The late ‘60s were a blessed time. Judging by the music, the movies and the arts in general, not to mention progress in medicine, science and technology, it looks like a fascinating period. The cars are part of it – earlier periods are very interesting too, but by the late ‘60s, things like monocoque construction, OHC engines and all-independent suspension were becoming truly democratized. The trick, of course, was to find a car that had all three. Case in point, the 1967-72 Datsun Bluebird 510.
In many ways, the 510 Bluebird is like a compilation of the ‘60s greatest automotive hits. And just like a compilation of ‘60s chart-toppers, it is a beloved and familiar classic that folks who were there at the time, but also seen as a 20th Century highlight by those of us who were born later and look at the historical context.
We can compare the 510 with the Bluebirds that came before it, which of course were somewhat inferior and more primitive. But look at the ones that came after: overwrought, overweight and awkward in the ‘70s, the nameplate then operated a complete U-turn to front-driven squaredom in 1983 and gradually lost itself. Like many of the old legacy nameplates, the Bluebird died when Nissan was taken over by those nasty Renault people.
Flock of Bluebirds: 210 & 310 at the top, 410 & 510 underneath.
The Bluebird name appeared in 1959 on the 310 Sedan, which had just replaced the Datsun 1000 Sedan (a.k.a the 210), the first Nissan to have an OHV engine and independent front suspension. (Yes, Japanese carmakers got IFS a bit later than the rest of the world. Toyota taxis still had front beam axles in 1960.) The Bluebird 410, which arrived in 1963, ushered the use of a monocoque body – and of competent styling, too.
The next generation 510, which hit Nissan’s Japanese showrooms in August 1967, was a smartly modernized 410, in terms of looks. It kept the quad headlamp theme that was extremely popular in Japan (and the US) at the time, but looked more like it had Italian genes, rather than American ones. Nissan called in the “Supersonic Line” in some of their adverts. Not sure why, really.
Under the hood, Nissan introduced the smaller L-Series engines with this model. The OHC L-Series, which came in 4-cyl. and 6-cyl. versions (and had 1.3 to 2.8 litres of displacement) powered all manner of Datsuns from 1965 to the late ‘80s. Nissan apparently looked to Mercedes and BMW for their inspiration, as well as Prince – though the design was finalized before Nissan took over that company.
The straight-6s, which came first, were seen in the Fairlady Z coupé, the Laurel, the Skyline, the Patrol and the Cedric / Gloria. The 4-cyl. (1300-2000cc) was used in all Bluebirds right up to the FWD era, as well as the Violet, the Sunny and the Silvia. Legends all, to be sure, but few were as classy-looking as the 510 Bluebird. This is ‘70s Nissan we’re talking about here.
On the 510, the L-Series variants were the 1296cc (77hp), the 1428cc (85 / 95hp), the twin-carb 1595cc (92 to 109hp, depending on the market and carb used) and, only in 1970-71, the 1770cc (105hp). Our feature car probably rolled off the production line with the 1.6 and two Hitachi carbs, like most SSS cars.
Norwegian advert, 1968
This well-born engine was served by a competent enough 4-speed manual transmission, with a fashionable (but not exactly excellent, according to period tests) floor change, sending the cavalry to the rear wheels. Suspension was completely new also: independent all around with MacPherson struts up front and a multilink / coil semi-trailing arm IRS using Prince Motors’ ball spline technology. This would have been very sophisticated for a German car – for a Japanese one, it was quite extraordinary.
Initially, only the four- and two-door saloons were available, soon joined by a wagon. By 1968, the Japanese market also saw the arrival of a sexy coupé with sequential turn signals, because nobody can resist a gimmick. As per usual, the van / wagon, as well as the Asian market taxi / base saloon, made do with a sturdier leaf-sprung live axle taken from the 520/521 Pickup (which is not related to the 510, but to the 410. Datsun’s numbering system is notoriously confusing…)
The two extremes of the 510 Bluebird range: the 1300 taxi and the twin-carb 1600 SSS
Saloons were available in a variety of trim levels, ranging from the mundane taxi to the sizzling SSS. The early version seen in the advert above, which is almost exactly identical to the car I found on the street, should have about 100hp to play with, as well as front disc brakes to keep up with the extra oomph. Some called these “the poor man’s BMW,” but maybe they were “the thinking man man’s Alfa Romeo,” too.
Our feature car’s interior has had a fair few mods. Judging by those Recaros, it looks like the owner of this car really likes to do some genuine rallying with it, which is quite a statement.
And it’s no figment of this car’s owner’s imagination. Datsun started using the international rally circuit as a proving ground since the late ‘50s – with success, too. The 510 Bluebird was no different. In fact, its punchier engine and more competent suspension helped the Datsun 1600 SSS win the 1970 East African Safari Rally, one of the most grueling races of the WRC. The Peugeot 404 won it several times in the mid-‘60s – didn’t hurt that car’s reputation at the time, either.
The other achievement that the 510 could rightfully claim: it was Nissan’s first bona fide international hit. The previous Bluebirds were peddled in North America, but the 510 was the first one to really make an impression. When Japanese production stopped in December 1972 (South Africa continued making their 510s locally until 1974), over 1.5 million units had been made in a little over five years.
Five years is not a very long production life, yet the 510 did manage to squeeze a few changes within that timeframe. At the end of 1968, the windshield wipers went parallel; the traditional mid-life mild facelift was also enacted in 1970, focusing on a more plasticky grille and uglified taillamps, as well as the 1.8 litre engine’s debut.
Said engine was soon gone, however, as the next generation “User-friendly” Bluebird 610 (yes, that’s how those were nicknamed by Nissan, at least in Japan) was launched in August 1971 and claimed the 1800cc 4-cyl. as its bread-and-butter. But the 610 was one of the cars that heralded the start of Nissan’s weird styling era. User-friendly though it were, it was also an eyesore.
It’s telling that the 510 continued being made for over a year after its successor was launched. According to Japanese sources, the smaller and smarter-looking 510 still had the favours of the buying public, both at home and abroad. The Bluebird carried on for many generations, but it did grow to be around the 2-litre mark, a size above the 510. That’s probably why this generation is so fondly remembered: the car hit the Goldilocks spot, neither too large nor too small, along with elegant styling, sweet engines and a sophisticated suspension. Nissan didn’t hit that sweet spot too often – few carmakers do, to be fair – but in this case, they did.
Related posts:
Curbside Classic: Datsun 510 (Bluebird/1600) – How To Fly, by PN
Vintage Review: 1968 Datsun PL510 – April 1968 Car and Driver Road Test, by GN
COAL: 1971 Datsun 510 – It Was The Best Of Times, It Was The Worst Of Times, by Michael Ionno
COAL: 1972 Datsun 510 – An Investment?, by James Pastor
CC Outtake: 1972 Datsun 510 Wagon, Green Edition, by Kevin Martin
CC Capsule: Datsun 510 Wagon, Aboriginal Style, by PN
CC Outtake: Datsun 510 Wagon With Unusual Engine Cover, by PN
CC Kids #2: 1968 Datsun 1600 (510)
These were among the first Japanese cars I saw, and I recall how quickly they multiplied after their introduction here.
Forgetting all of the car’s other attributes, there is an inherent “rightness” about its styling. Conservative but not stodgy, and with proportions and an amount of trim that are hard to fault. Goldilocks would approve.
The advert 1968 must be from Norway.
Right you are — fixed it. Tak!
Nissan discovered IFS by building rebadged Austins from the late 40s Isuzu discovered IFS from its Hillman building efforts why any others missed out is their fault oh and those Austins became monocoque in 55 by the time the 510 came into production such things were very old, IRS goes back to the dawn of the 20th century and OHC not long after that, Kudos to Datsun for putting it all in a reasonably priced package but their other offerings aside from the upmarket range were still OHV Austin knockoffs in many markets, the 210 and pickup still had Austin A & B derived OHV for several more years here and due to that had anvil like reliability.
No roll cage means that car cant really be used in proper rally competition and a roll cage certainly ties the otherwise flimsy 510 into a tight package B pillar shake on corrugated gravel roads in one of those Bluebirds is truly something to behold.
I consider this era of the Datsun 510 to be the frugal person’s BMW 2002, or at least the BMW 1600. I owned a 1600 and it was great. I also drove a 510 and found it equally pleasing.
I’ve driven (not owned) both also, and I’m sure the only meaningful difference in favour of the German was my own snobbery.
It sure couldn’t have been looks, as one was very, very dull and the other angular and borderline ugly.
Perhaps it was the undoubtedly nicer version of a crappy black plastic interior on the BM that swung it!
a multilink / coil semi-trailing arm IRS
I see a classic semi-trailing arm IRS, but no “multilinks”.
It’s nice to see one of these SSS versions. Too bad they weren’t imported to the US. But increasing the performance of the regular 510 soon became a major industry.
This really is a landmark car, at least in the US, as it was the first Japanese sedan that really caught the eye of enthusiasts. It became the equivalent of the Tri-Five Chevys. Dropping in a 2 L version of the L-Series from a later 610/710 became the equivalent of dropping in a 327 or 350 into a ’55-’57. And go-fast parts were cheap and widely available.
The original “ricer”.
They used to be really popular in Australia even well into the 90’s. I recall a “Fast Fours” magazine which featured a good handful of modified ones of various different persuasions. From bored and stroked carb’d L20’s, to CA18DET and FJ20DET ones.
I still see two of these, in very nice condition, around my area now and then. Now and then because they are owned by two different parts guys, in their 60s, at two different independent auto parts stores I frequent. I remember when they showed up, as well as the 240Z, and then got to drive one for a weekend at Sears Point later.
Hello Nissan!
THIS – ALL DAY LONG.
This car was what made put Datsun on the map. A terrific looking simple sedan that couldn’t be improved visually. This is what every auto manufacturer in this category should have been producing. Compare this beautiful car to a Pinto, Vega or Gremlin. It looked better than what Toyota was producing that year and Toyota took at least five years to produce a similar looking Corolla.
The 510 was the perfect machine of its kind and it wasn’t until the Honda Civic four years later that it was topped.
How I hoped Nissan could find its 510 roots again. What they are putting out today isn’t in the same league at all.
Exactly.
Somehow Nissan managed to leap several generations ahead of the competition with this model, then couldn’t seem to figure out where to go with subsequent models.
An absolute gem of a car.
How odd. The one thing I’d never grant these is markedly good looks, especially over something as sweet as a Vega. To me, very dull, a Hillman Hunter or a lesser Cortina Mk2 at best. I WILL grant that the subsequent baroquery Nissan smeared upon its productions for too long thereafter was most unpleasant, and confoundingly far from this, but terrific-looking? Maybe you’re cat-like, and prefer the box in which the gift came to the gift.
As for the quality of the thing as a car, it has arguably never been equalled as a class leader by Nissan. The fact it made the exxy BMW 2002 look like a questionable purchase (and a much less tough one) says everything.
An absolute icon for Nissan, IMO. I love the coupe, one of them would be a great find. We still have a few around here in NZ, but they’re far from common, even for a car of that age.
Just a couple of my usual additions, the Bluebird name lived on for a fair while after the formation of the “alliance”, on the Bluebird Sylphy, right through till the early 2010’s. That said the “Bluebird” portion of the badge was much smaller than the “Sylphy” and eventually was dropped and it just became “Sylphy”.
You also mentioned that the Bluebird eventually became a 2 litre, and that’s true for most, except a very few U13’s in Japan, and the Australian spec U12 and U13 which used the 2.4 KA24E and DE engines.
Is it too much to call these The Most Classic Japanese Sedan Ever?
These were such a massive leap forward from the previous model. In sixties Australia, it seemed as though all the Japanese companies were trying to establish themselves. Japanese cars seemed unbelievably well-equipped, invariably (almost suspiciously) cheap, but there was nothing to really distinguish one brand from another; nothing that really made a Datsun stand out from a Toyota, an Isuzu, a Prince, a Daihatsu, a Mazda or a Mitsubishi. (Hino never really got going here, and Honda were sports cars only in the mid sixties, and Suzuki hadn’t appeared here yet. Have I forgotten anyone?) They were all new companies to us with no reputation, no apparent reason to favour one brand over another. Now sure, they didn’t all make cars that directly competed, but there was such a flurry of new brands in the space of about five years. When they all lobbed on the market at about the same time, with no known reputation, which would a buyer choose – or would he/she stick with the old familiar Austin, Morris or Hillman?
With this model, Datsun suddenly made the choice easy. It leapt to the front of the pack, set them apart from the crowd and gave them an identity – and a reputation that unfortunately subsequent Bluebirds could never live up to. That’s sad.
By the way, I always wondered why Nissan referred to its successor as the Bluebird-U on the Japanese market. User-friendly! How about that? (linguist mode on) I hadn’t heard the expression until computers entered my life in the nineties; that would have been a very early use of it – and from the Japanese, too! (linguist mode off)
Lesson for the day! 🙂
We had a 1968 Datsun 1600 when I was a child in Canada – https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/cc-kids-2-1968-datsun-1600-510/
A year or two later they were rebadged 510 and got the parallel wipers as mentioned above, a different instrument panel and more 1970s colours.
I remember seeing the owner’s manual for our car, which had it in the middle of the range which also listed the 1300 and the 1600SS – but I don’t remember ever seeing either of those, so they must not have sold well locally. I asked my father why he hadn’t bought the 1600SS, and he said that the 1600 gave the best balance of what they needed – this struck my 10-year-old self as a very poor excuse.
‘monocoque body, OHC engines, all independent suspension” You just described my 1970 Honda Trail 70.
My kindergarten teacher had one of these. Four year old me only drew 510s, well most kids did, but I knew what it was. 5-1-0. That’s my origin story and I’m sticking to it.
Solid 510 ownership for the last 36 years. A succession of cars beginning with a longroof and ending with a longroof. Two door sedan in the middle. All abnormally aspirated in various block/head/cam combinations. Japanese car. Italian carbureters. Yes plural. Coast to coast road trip in my first longroof. Lots of parts cars and other Datsuns along the way too. I still have a couple of cars worth of parts disassembled in the basement. Longroof in the garage.
Except for the IRS, there is absolutely nothing that makes the 510 in any way, shape, or form superior over my 1970 Toyota Corona Mark II. Was around buckets of both of these machines in the early ’80s when they were 10-12 yr old used cars. The Toyota was quieter, much stiffer body structure, even being a 2 door hardtop (no B pillar) more engine compartment room because they didn’t use cheaper to build Mac struts (no advantage over a properly designed SALA suspension). The Toyota’s 1.9L 8R-C had more power (108hp vs 96) much more torque. And being all iron, it didn’t eat head gaskets. Overall build quality a few clicks over Nissan, you could certainly tell by the time they were 10 yrs old. Don’t get me wrong I’ve always liked these 510’s, but they are simply overrated compared to what was in the Toyota dealer showroom across the street at the time.
Some good points there. If the RT70s series hardtop felt stiffer than a conventional sedan of the same era I’d be worried.
I tenner a road test comparing the 610 180B SSS hardtop against a TA22 Celica and the comment that the Celicas pillarless body was stiffer than the 180B.
I love the 510/1600/Bluebird especially the SSS and the coupes never available where I live but a Toyota with the 510’s desirable attributes would have fantastic at the time.
Perhaps a RT72 wth IRS…..
The bargain basement appearance and trim of the Australian models with painted interior metal sections, and no console, bland colours and strip speedo in the early versions etc was a real turn off too.
The 510/1600’s would do 7,000+ rpm stock standard – if very raucously – and the bodies were tanky enough that the huge numbers rallied weren’t ever strengthened (AFAIK). The very well set-up IRS was very, very effective for handling. SLA is for sure a superior front end for geometry and so on, but struts have proved their worth many times over, and good ones (like all BMs’) can work better than not-great SLA’s. Anyway, both cars had crappy Japanese steering of the time.
They did indeed blow head gaskets at least once per hundred thousand, they were noisy and basic and a bit crude, but their reputation comes from those who tried to kill them, and couldn’t. I reckon that distinguishes them a fair bit from the good old Corona (which wasn’t rallied, I don’t think).
For looks, I’d well-prefer the Toyota, and for daily driving also, but that 8R-C is a revless potterer, and if you wanted to hammer the Toyota one day on the right backroad, it simply wouldn’t be close, engine or especially, IRS. I suspect the latter is the biggest differentiator of all.
Yes the IRS would have been the biggest contributor by far.
I know the 510/1600 could rev to 7000 but there was no point in doing so performance wise, and they sounded bloody awful in doing it.
Whilst growing up, I could hear the cacophony of a high revving L series Datsun motor in a 1600/180B/200B/Bluebird from 2 suburbs away. At times like that I was glad I had my Fiat 125S, with its leaf spring rear end LOL.
It was a landmark car, one of the very few collectable Japanese cars from that era, it and it’s stablemate Z car. It, the Z car and the little brother 1200 were probably the high point for Datsun, The 610/710/B210 and especially F10 were all inferior and sales showed it.
From the few miles I put in on them I recall the ride being outstanding but power was a little disappointing. A friend who was an enthusiast said his was a little slower than a BMW 1600 stock, but a tiny bit faster with minor modifications.
They also had a very successful racing career, from the rallying mentioned to the Showroom Stock series IIRC that literally lasted for decades.