300zx TT

love how they look but looking under the hood just scares me...

I've driven both a R32 GT-R and Z32 300zx and they felt fantastic and very similar to drive(both had the rear steer). The key difference was at the limit the gtr has so much more grip but 9/10th's of the time they where very evenly matched.

The 300zx is a pain in the A to work on but so was my supra and my friends gtr, any time you shove that much under stuff under the hood things get challenging.

Think of it like a 3000gt with 2wd, better looks, better power, and MUCH better reliability.

There are 2wd 3000gts.. and most people prefer the 4wd. Just sayin..

As for better power.. huh? You mean stock?

And as for reliability, if you dont have to change timing belts and oil on a 300zx that's news to me.

I think 300zx's are pretty cool.

I would go for a talon tsi awd or eclipse gsx long before I ever considered a 3000gt.

Vigo wrote:

Think of it like a 3000gt with 2wd, better looks, better power, and MUCH better reliability.

There are 2wd 3000gts.. and most people prefer the 4wd. Just sayin..

Yes, but they are non-turbo and FWD, correct?

In reply to z31maniac:

Yep.

z31maniac wrote:

Vigo wrote:

Think of it like a 3000gt with 2wd, better looks, better power, and MUCH better reliability.

There are 2wd 3000gts.. and most people prefer the 4wd. Just sayin..

Yes, but they are non-turbo and FWD, correct?

this was what I meant. I meant to put vr4.
The better looks part is subjective, and better power could maybe be amended to better power for a longer amount of time than a month or two.
and I love vr4's. forreal. I just love the z32tt more=]

Just pointing out Vigo was making a very strange comparison by comparing a car with 1/3 less HP and different drivetrain config.

And i was just pointing out that corytate was making a very dubious point claiming that the 2wd of the nissan was superior to the AWD of the mitsu. Maybe when they are stock, RWD is ok, but either car can easily be modified to make enough power to spin the rear wheels right up to 100mph, and if you PLAN to make actual power, claiming RWD superiority is not exactly a gimme.

Vigo wrote: And i was just pointing out that corytate was making a very dubious point claiming that the 2wd of the nissan was superior to the AWD of the mitsu. Maybe when they are stock, RWD is ok, but either car can easily be modified to make enough power to spin the rear wheels right up to 100mph, and if you PLAN to make actual power, claiming RWD superiority is not exactly a gimme.

not so much rwd superiority as I'd rather have a rwd in a car like that. Idk. Just my preference. I'd rather have a twin turbo rwd 3000gt than fwd NA or awd TT.
"now the world don't beat, to the beat of just one drum. What might be right for you, may not be right for some.." etc et al

I'd rather have a MKIV Supra or FD RX7 (although a LSx swapped one) over the 3000GT or 300ZX by a country mile.

93EXCivic wrote: I'd rather have a MKIV Supra or FD RX7 (although a LSx swapped one) over the 3000GT or 300ZX by a country mile.

I agree on the RX personally.

Don't find the Supra, 3000GT, or 300ZX that aesthetically appealing.

Cool car. I drove one back in the day with the full HKS upgrades turbos and all. Fastest accelerating car that I have ever driven. It was brutally fast. Needed brakes after all that work though.

93EXCivic wrote: I'd rather have a MKIV Supra or FD RX7 (although a LSx swapped one) over the 3000GT or 300ZX by a country mile.

So would a lot of people. That's why a clean Supra or FD will cost double what a Z32 Turbo will. N/A, the Supra is probably nearly 3x the price of the Z32 (although arguably a much better platform as the NA supra can handle boost).

I know a guy that got a 14.9 out of his na/5spd z32 with basic mods. Thats a full 3 tenths faster than my dodge dynasty with a slipping clutch that i sold for $400. But really, its not slow. For a lot of people i think the n/a is a fair trade of performance loss for failure point decreases.

I also beat two different automatic z32s in street races with 16 and 17 second cars. lol

Moral of the story: If you get an automatic, you're an idiot, and drive an n/a 5spd before you totally dismiss them.

Yeah, the N/A is kinda slow. A slicktop @ ST prep wouldn't be too terribly slow, but still nothing compared to the TT. With bolt ons they are around 225whp, and a slicktop will weigh around 3000lbs without any extensive weight reduction. Should do better than a 14.9. I think most N/A guys are hitting low 14s and some crack into the 13s.

Still not as fast as it looks though.

Yeah, i think the basic mods i mentioned were intake and exhaust. Maybe an UDP? Anyway, as you say, they are not that slow of cars, but slower than they look and not even in the ballpark of a stock turbo car.

Drove my '92 5-spd TT to work today, hard to pry the keys out of my wife's hands. We only drive it in the summer months, and she pretty much has constant dibs.

Have 145k miles on it now, went through a lot of basic maintenance after buying it with 100k-ish. Biggest thing was replacing all the rubber coolant hoses, I mean every single one, and there is quite a few. The worst part about working on them is if you drop something, anything, it is not going to fall out of the bottom, it just disappears.

93EXCivic wrote: I'd rather have a ... FD RX7 (although a LSx swapped one) over the 3000GT or 300ZX by a country mile.

Well, duh.

But good luck finding an FD for the price of a 300ZX.