Given the choice, which would you choose? 240Z, 260Z, or 280Z? I don't know enough about them

240z or early pre-74 1/2 260z.

Pic related, here's my early model 260z.

where does the fairlady z 432 fit in?

240z hands down. It only gets worse the newer you get.

Where do you think the most rare and desirable s30 chassis falls in? The head/valve train alone is worth more than some mint 240zs.

While i agree, i do know that is quite wrong.

You can strip the bumpers and the spare tire and shit and save almost 300lbs

Why pre-1974? I'm curious as to the reasons.

Why is that?

Pre 74 1/2 260z retained most of the chassis characteristics of a 240z. It was after 74 1/2 where the 260z chassis gained more weight from re-enforcement. Early 260z just had the big bumpers that everyone ditches, and the smog heavy SU flat top carbs, but many had those swapped for a 240z round top carb. If you can find a early 260z, you'd get a cheaper car than a 240z or 280z, .2L engine capacity over the 240z and it will probably have the round tops already on it. It will also have an electric fuel pump as opposed to purely mechanical which helped with fuel vapor issues. It also will have a rear anti-roll bar which improved handling considerably over its 240z younger brother.

Me personally? 280zx because I like goofy cushy grand tourers. Take the earlier models if you want a more aggressive, genuine ride.

240z
cuz it speaks to me

ahem.

This is a shameless repost of what memeber "BRAAP" posted on HybridZ, so all credit goes to him.

>"Model run:
>'240Z: '70-'73
>260Z: '74, early and late variation
>280Z: '75-'78

>Exterior
Body line wise, ’70-’78 were pretty similar. The creases, roof, fender, and hood lines were all the same. Exterior differences were the bumpers of course, taillights changed at the introduction of the 260. The front lower valence on the late 260 and all 280’s is lower, (to accommodate the larger radiator and open up the radiator opening to compensate for the larger bumper), and the late 260 and all 280’s also have the front turn signals in the grill just under the hood instead of the below the bumper in the valence corners as on the 240 and early 260. The very early 240 had the interior vent outlets on the bottom of the rear hatch, late 240 and all subsequent 260 and 280 cars that interior outlet vent was on the "C" pillar behind the badge just behind the quarter light.

Part 1/3

>Interior.
In general terms there were two distinct interior designs. The 240 was one, and then the 260/280 was the other. The 240 didn’t have to many interior changes through its production. The 260 interior was totally revamped. The 280 retained the 260 interior. In ’76, the shoulder belt mount point went from the “C” pillar to the strut tower, (seat belt doesn’t dig into your neck as much on the ‘76+ cars). Also, in ’76, the AMP gauge became the Volt gauge with a fiber optic charge light. In ’77 the only significant interior changes were the font style of the gauges and the doors received a total redesign internally, which relocated the window crank and the door lock switch. The door changes in ’77, (which carried over to the ’78), made for much heavier doors, but the window regulators were much smoother and the actual door striker design was totally different than the earlier ’70-’76 doors. Doors for the ’77-’78 will not interchange with the earlier doors due to the different striker design. In ’78, the speedo received KMH in small blue print. Either in ’77 or ’78, under dash foot well lighting was also added. In ’77, the Z received larger capacity fuel tank which encroached on the spare tire well necessitating the space saver spare, (the 240, 260 and ’75-76 280 received a full size spare tire), and also the ’77-78 rear hatch area now has a raised false floor which was to accommodate the larger fuel tank and that little deflated spare. Depending on which manufacturing plant the ‘77/78 was manufactured in dictated how the that false floor in the hatch area finished out to the rear. Some were flat level all the way back, others kicked up at 45 degrees to the hatch.

>Structural

There were subtle structural differences as well. The late 260 and 280, the trans tunnel was widened substantially at the bottom. For some guys doing V-8 conversions, that is a big plus for exhaust routing. The T/C rod mounts were beefier as well as portions of the frame rails on the late 260 and 280 vs the 240 shell. As mentioned above, the late 260 and 280 had a larger radiator opening and as such, the lower core support dropped.

>Suspension

Functionally and in basic design, they were all similar. The 280 strut tubes were a little thicker, the 280 had a little more caster, it has been said that the 280 rear control arms are a little heaver gauge material. The front cross member of the 280 is a little beefier as well. Brakes were the same, though the later 280 had anchored dual piston wheel cylinders in the drums vs the earlier sliding single piston wheel cylinder. The 260 received slower steering rack and pinion and the pinion housing was cast iron vs the 240’s aluminum. (The rack and pinion may have been and early to late 260 change, someone else here would know for sure).

>Power train

The 240 had the 2.4 liter inline 6 cylinder (L24), the 260 had the 2.6 liter etc. ’70-’72 had the desirable 'round top' SU carbs, while the ’73 240 and the 260 received the 'flat top' SU carbs, which are heavily smogged carbs that people complain about. The 280 received the virtually maintenance free EFI (Dat L24 edit: if the injectors are clean, contacts are clean, rubber is new, and the ECU isn't shit). Electronic ignition was first used on the 260 and carried through the 280 series. 5 speeds became available in ’77. In regards to the engine and trans, due to the cars age and all the previous owners, it could have any engine and trans and any induction system as they all readily interchange.

There are other subtle details that I’m sure others will fill in, but that should give some idea as what the major particulars are.

Also, in response to the guaranteed question "but what about the '79-'83 280ZX, isn't that the same?"

Well the main difference between the 240Z/260Z/280Z and 280ZX is that they are completely different cars.

Okay: you've got your S30 chassis. That was made from model year 1970 to 1978. That includes the 240Z, the 260Z, and the 280Z.
There were a few minor changes though the years like some thicker metal on some stampings, frame rail length, side impact protection, etc, but the chassis dimensionally is the same.

Then you've got your S130 chassis, from model year 1979 to 1983. That was marketed as the 280ZX.

The S30 and the S130 are *completely* different cars.

The only thing they share are the basic drive train design, a few small trim pieces and some light bulbs.

Close name, completely different chassis.

The S30 is lightweight, handles well, and has a fairly spartan interior all considered (sans '77 and '78 models). It is a sports car, no doubt.

The S130 is heavier by almost 700lbs in some cases, it's plush, it has a lot of smog shit on it, ugly ass crash bumpers, and it's a bit more cramped inside thanks to "HOLY FUCK LOOK AT ALL THIS LUXURY"

But the biggest performance difference is suspension.

See, the S30 has a chapman strut with rear A arm, where the S130 went with the semi trailing arm like that of the early 510s. The S130/510 rear suspension works alright, but is inferior to the early S30 setup, due to the fact that the semi trailing arm setup has huge amounts of squat under acceleration which results in camber & toe changes. The most likely reason is that the semi trailing arm setup allows for a lower floor, hence, more cabin space. It's all about packaging, not about being better.

How much fun you would have with the S130? I think you'd have a lot of fun, depending on how you used it. The aftermarket for S130's is smaller than for S30's, and their value is much less than S30's, but I think that will change with time.

The 280zx is about the same weight as the later year 280z. The 79 is actually lighter than a 78

Series 1 240z

Sex on wheels

240z is the best if you can find one with little or no rust but the pre 76 280zs are really good aswell. Just make sure to remove the bumpers and spare tires to get rid of some of the extra weight if you go for a 280z.

>uncle offers me his 240z years ago
>was not into cars and said no thanks

JUST. FUCKING. KILL. ME.

Without a doubt.

correction: the base model, VERY difficult to find 4 speed '79 280ZX is lighter than the most optioned out '78 280Z.

That said, a base trim hard top coupe is a hell of a fun car. Hell, with an RB20DET, it'd be a great cheap and fast beater.

Toyota supra is better. Sorry.

240z all day every day, Stock power doesnt matter, the L series is a garbage motor anyway, And the Interior and exterior Trims are infinitely better looking on the 240's

Suicide is the only option

You clown.

>the L series is a garbage motor anyway

>implying the L-series engine wasn't one of the highest quality engines Nissan ever produced, capable of surpassing 400,000 miles with just valve adjustments and regular maintenance (plugs, wires, fluid changes, etc).

Forged crank, forged rods, about the highest quality cast pistons you could get back in the day, amazing tolerances, wonderful steel used throughout, unrealistic yet attained quality control.... they really were the crown jewel of Nissan for a long time.

You can go and find a junkyard L-series with probably 250,000 miles on it (a feat in itself, coming from a car from the early 70's to early 80's), and take the head off: inside you're likely to find factory crosshatching on the hone.

These things are fucking tanks, with an amazing oiling system that you can push to the 600hp range (with forced induction) and not even think about it.

The only downfall of these engines is that they were not crossflow heads, but this does give you one benefit: maintenance is a BREEZE. Oil, filter, and plug changes take maybe 15 minutes. Combined.

And even though they were crossflow, give me $2,000 and I can make a 230hp, naturally aspirated, high revving (8,000rpm) big bore L26 that sounds like tits, and has substantial torque from 2,300rpm to 7,500rpm (roughly). That is nothing to laugh at in a 2,300lb car with fantastic handling characteristics.

Do not underestimate the L-series; they will run till the heat death of the sun.

(also here's some orgasmic sound)

youtube.com/watch?v=dtUk9F2uWbk

240Z of course

I've grown a fondness for El Rusto here, but I'd take a 240 like over any of them.

Fucking retard has no idea that the L series is one of the greatest engines of all time.