I am thinking of precipitating divorce by picking up a 280zx (supposedly only 130K original - car looks way nice).
While I am pretty familiar with the original body Z's, I know next to nothing about these.
Strong points, weak points, quirks, etc?
Cheers.
Having owned a '76 280Z I've always found the 280ZX to be one of those instances where the "newer and improved" version....wasn't all that attractive. Which is not to say, don't buy this car, just that I personally prefer the Z or the ZXs.
That said, the biggest issue is still RUST. Look under the car, particularly at the front frame rails that "cradle" the engine, look in the engine compartment (especially around the battery support), and look at the trailing edge of the front fenders and leading edge of the rear fenders. Like the "Z" cars, parts are easily available for the "ZX" series.
If this car was a manual transmissioned NON T-Top car (most/nearly all ZXs had T-Tops AFTER 1980) I'd be wanting to look at it, myself. Good luck.
My friend is selling his 280zx
Been sorted through and IIRC he is asking about $4k for it.
I can put you in touch if you want, the car is located in Cumberland MD.
Well, you could mail me the struts, trailing arms and brakes for my 510 if you want.
My wife bought one new circa 1982 (non-t-top, manual trans) and drove it a troublefree 150k... to this day her favorite car.
I've looked at a few clean low miles examples (even a couple of turbos) in the $2500-5000 range... seems like a real deal for an undervalued car. The MD car looks particularly appealing!!
Integraguy - I'm in the desert, so unless it's a midwest/east coast car (does not appear to be) I should be safe there. I'm hip on the early body cars (had 3, still miss them...).
Apexcarver - MD is a bit far, but thanks (car does look really good).
I know on the early body cars, the steering rack gets a lot of play (the 78's had the best rack), for the 240s the 72's had the rear end moved to eliminate the u-joint issue, under the battery tray is an issue, shifter bushings, urethane makes a huge difference in the suspension, etc... just wondering about that kind of thing on the ZX.
You'll know I got the car if my next post on it is, "Selling 79 280zx to pay for divorce attorney...."
IIRC correctly....
The Zx had semi-trailing arm rear suspension (Borrowed from a Nissan sedan.) that was universally cursed by those people trained on Z cars.
So.....the Zx, if rust free is probably a good daily driver, but not so promising as a performance car...
Rog
Watch for rust. The engines are bulletproof, the transmissions and rear end are stout enough, but the body is weak. Rear fender lips, "doglegs" by where the door closes, the subframe rails and floors, around the windshield, inside the back hatch if the tail light seals leak and the lower fenders are all favorite rust spots. Urethane suspension parts are a good upgrade, but stick with rubber bushings on the t/c rods.
Yea I know its not the best handling or performing car in the world but its very easy to work on and a lot of fun to drive. I love my 82.
They are okay daily drivers, the interiors were a big leap ahead of the original Z car, much more comfortable. But they are also quite porky compared to the original and, to me, sorta 'numb' feeling. More of a 'secretaries' car' than a true sports car. But I still wouldn't mind having a hardtop version.
There was someone making convertible conversion kits way back when. IMHO it actually turns out nice looking but the body flops around like a fish once the roof is cut off.
They have the goofiest driving sensations ever.
Wheelbase short as a Miata, and you're sitting basically with your head over the rear axle. Plenty torque from the engine. The rear suspension is the source of most of the goofiness. Every time you feed any power (ANY power) into the drivetrain, it sucks the rear tires up into the wheelwell like you just jumped into a lake in January. If the shocks are at all worn, you can pogo your way down the road.
This does not actually prevent me from wanting one, mind you. It's like a Z-car without the Z-car surcharge. (Cheap ZXs are cheaper and in far better shape than cheap Zs)
Rust is ALWAYS an issue with a Z, even a Southern car.
Frames and floorpans seem to be specially designed to return to the earth with great thoroughness and speed.
All the suspension "goofiness" is fixable with off the shelf aftermarket parts.
They're WAY more stable at high speed than the 1st Gen Z cars and they are far more tractable and don't require the carb adjustments or points replacements from the early carb'd Z's either.
If you want to upgrade to get maximum tune-ability a cheap upgrade to MSnS is a relatively easy upgrade.
Things to avoid: 1. A car with NO automatic climate control 2. A 2+2 3. An Automatic 4. TTops 5. Sun/Moon Roofs (These were never factory options! All are aftermarket CRAP!) 6. Rust - Under the battery tray - In the spare tire well - front frame rails - floor pans 7. Interior rot (interior pieces are hard to come by)
Things to look for: 1. TURBO! 2. 5 Speed
Good luck! WW
P.S. I do have a few Datsun's... and although that by itself doesn't make me an expert, it does make me an expert in RUST!
The suspension is kind of goofy. If most cars have anti-squat geometry, those ZX's have pro squat.
Before we started the magazine, my old boss had one of these and I spent a lot of time in it. It really was a nice car and way more comfortable than the 240-Z I was driving at the time.
We always had Z's when I was growing up, starting with a 240 and ending with an '83 ZX. I even took my driving test in one.
I currently have a '71, and had the '83 my parents bought new for a couple of years until I sold it to a friend. The biggest issue is rust, no doubt. Everything else can be upgraded. They are very very similar to the original cars underneath, and can be modified to drive so much better than they were delivered in stock form. They also have a better cg than the 240 or 280 ever thought of having.
It's why they were so much better as race cars. People tend to forget that the ZX's were much better racers than the Z was, mainly due to more raked windscreen if I remember correctly, and the homologated rear spoiler.
While it may never be as "raw" as the 240, it does have it's own charm, and once you upgrade the suspension, they drive pretty good too.
The engine, trans and diff are the same as the early Z's so if they are kept full of oil and water they run forever (if the body doesn't fall off around it). My 78 280Z has over 320K on it. I did rebuild the engine at 250K but it still looked good inside. Everyone else has mentioned upgrading the suspension to make it feel better. I used to have a 79 Fairlady which was fun mainly because it was R/H drive. It died a painful rusty death.
the S130 makes a much better street driver than the s30, for my money an 82-83 turbo 5 speed 2 seater is the pick of the litter, the 81 turbo was available only with an auto and had an odd crank trigger
