Right now I own a 1991 Mazda rx7 convertible that i bought as a project car. I always look on craigslist and I saw a car that I have always loved. A 1979 datsun 280zx. He wants to trade project for project. I love my rx7 but if he wants to trade for the 280zx i'm fine with that. I want to know which car is faster my 1991 rx7 convertible or his 1979 280zx. Both are naturally aspirated but the 280zx has an hks exhaust. Please no biased opinions. The rx7 is fun to drive but it is kinda slow I want to make sure im not getting anything slower. Also I want to be able to smoke the tires haha

 

The 7

 

Stock to stock the 7 has a 0-60 of 6.9 seconds, the z is a bit slower at 9.2. 1/4 mile times for the 7 are 14.9, the z about 16.7. So, unbiased, the 7 is faster.

 

Where do those numbers come from? He has a convertible, so those numbers seem way off. I have a book with period road tests and the convertible seems to average anywhere from high 7 to low 10 second 0-60 times and 1/4 mile around 17-18 seconds.

 

Yeah convertibles are slow....condition is the 280zx? 79 not most desirable year by any means..

post a link from cl

 

Missed the part about the convertible, which is quite a bit slower than the coupes, no surprise there. Numbers for the 7 came from here but I think I hit a typo, beside missing the point of it being a coupe. I'm on a role tonight with misreads and typos, 12hrs under the car today in the heat messed me up lol.

Here's the corrected numbers from the link for an 89-91 5-speed vert. 0-60: 8.7, and 1/4 mile: 16.8

Here's some specs on a few different 79 Z's. 0-60: from a 9.0 up to 11.3. 1/4 miles: from 17.0 up to 18.4. Again, all depends on what's all under/in the Z.

 

here is the CL link
http://greensboro.craigslist.org/cto/4113105922.html

 

Says in the ad he wants to trade for a Jeep or a lifted 4 x 4, but he's willing to accept your RX instead?
Kid's kinda all over the place.

I'd consider such a trade if it was a Z instead of a ZX.

 

yeah. I've already contacted him and he said he's interested

 

I have a '73 240z with a 2.8L engine and 5 speed. It is much lighter than the 280zx and the raw speed feels much faster than my '91 Rx7 vert. Both are fun to drive and excellent cars in radically different ways. IMO, this is a win-win decision but as noted before, you may want to stick to your vert and wait for a z rather than a zx.

 

why a z instead of a zx. What's the big difference

 

The Z is simpler, lighter and endearingly crude.
The ZX is much more complex, heavier and has a more pimped out interior.

The ZX engine is burdened with a shitton of useless/complicated emissions crap, earlier Zs have carbs.

 

yeah ... this is a 6 of one, half dozen of the other kind of situation. neither the Rx-7 drop nor the 280ZX are fast cars. you would quite literally have to put the same amount of effort (cost may or may not be different) in each of them to make them fast.

keep in mind that i am an avid Z-car enthusiast - always have been and probably always will be!

Clokker sums up my thoughts perfectly ...

this.

and this.

if your motivation for change would also be for a performance improvement, i'd skip the trade. if you just want to get a Z(X) because you've always wanted one, then hey ... go for it.

 

the Z has nicely sculpted exterior lines,

the ZX is stomach turning, and went all velour on the inside.

i know i grew up in the 80's but the ZX was horrible then, its awful now. the Z on the other hand was great, and its an odd quirk that they started with a great car and every year it gets worse, all the way up to the 350Z!

so if it was Z to Rx7, i might do it, the Z seems cool, but ZX for Rx7 is a no.

 

It looks to be in decent condition he already did the usdm ugly bumper delete looks good could look better with some wide *** wheels


But do not expect it to be fast that thing is heavy..

A nice swap could fix her up tho

I've driven a 75 280z and it was beyond slow tho it was Piece of crap with like 240k lol

I'm pretty sure z guys swap rear ends for the ratio differences I dont know which year has best ratio but I know there is a difference

When it comes down to it a rx7 vert and the zx are just cool cruisers ...not track cars

 

The 240 and 260z's had carbs. The 280z had fuel injection though still less burden by the emissions than the later zx. It was the most powerful of the trio of original z cars.
I'm with the others on this, if it were a 280z I would consider it. A zx I would pass.

 

well there are technically 4 different Z.

240z which is around 2400lbs

early 260z which is like the 240z
later 260z which is like the 280z

280z which is around 2800lbs


rear diff are interchangeable for the Z and very easy to swap for stronger long nose r200 using factory parts. they also have kits to swap in short nose r200 or armada r230 which is bigger than ford 9".

so diff options are indeed everywhere. Not to mention those early Z are down to bare essential i mean panels are like lightweight from factory lol



as far as faster, I wouldnt consider this a question in my book.
Pick what you like best looks wise and mod that.

I wouldnt get the ZX, ugly IMO.

between the 240z/early 260z and rx7(not vert)
its a hard decision. those two are my two favorite car in my price range lol

 

ugly bumper delete = it fell off... he has a fuel filter on his mod list. obviously grasping at straws when normal maintenance is a key selling point

 

HKS exhaust= HELLAFAST.

 

I agree about the diff options (Subarus use a r180 style LSD that is a direct bolt in also) but disagree about the "lightweight" metal panels.
I can't verify it scientifically (because I'm lazy and not actually a scientist) but would guess that the sheetmetal on my 77 Z is at least 10% thicker than that in my FC and about 50% heavier than the pretend metal of the FD.
The Z is also a product of "pre-plastic" Japanese design, pretty much everything is metal and has metal hardware...no plastic clips or multipurpose moldings.

As heavy as the raw materials might be, the Z bodyshell is still a crude, first gen unibody design, very poorly braced/stiffened (which Nissan tried to address- with some success- in the transition to the 280 Z), so it may in fact weigh less than the later FC design but the drivetrain is where the big weight lives.

The massive cast iron engine block and the ginormous iron diff both dwarf the weights of the FC counterparts.

On a pickier but still relevant note...the ZX STILL has 4 lug hubs which means your wheel choices will suck.

 

Lol true

 

stock for stock they would be close.

stock for stock which car actually makes the rated horsepower of the factory or closest to it? this can vary quite a bit in favor of either car.

the Z is heavier but it does have more potential to be a bit faster than the n/a RX7 does.


either car could be a complete pile, uncapable of breaking 20s in the 1/4 mile... but at least with the Z you are starting with an inline 6 that has a bit of aftermarket following still. throw cams in it, weber intake, exhaust and it comes alive versus the RX7 which you can put intake and exhaust on to barely make a scratch in the power level.

there simply isn't a lot of untapped potential in an n/a rotary car.

 

Well i decided not to trde because it was 4 hrs. Away. However someone texted me asking to trade for a 1971 mustang!!!!! So i might get that

 

i had a '69 elcamino and my TII, one had to go and it was the elcamino.

nothing sucks worse than getting 12mpg highway if you were lucky and didn't romp on it. i do miss the torque of that 383 small block though.

 

i had a modded 68 mustang and a bone stock 86 base model FC once, and the FC ran rings around the mustang, almost literally.

the mustang is cool though