2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992) 1986-1992 Discussion including performance modifications and technical support sections.
Sponsored by:

1991 Rx7 vs. 1979 280zx

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10-07-13, 08:34 PM
  #1  
Full Member
Thread Starter
 
VasiliBrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: NC
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
1991 Rx7 vs. 1979 280zx

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
Old 10-07-13, 09:07 PM
  #2  
mattg prob nt coming back

iTrader: (3)
 
FC3S_nataku's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: OrangePark FL
Posts: 1,933
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The 7
Old 10-07-13, 09:24 PM
  #3  
Senior Member

iTrader: (3)
 
88_N/A_GXL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Glenwood, Iowa
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
Old 10-07-13, 09:43 PM
  #4  
Rabbit hole specialist
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (11)
 
JerryLH3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 2,831
Received 213 Likes on 131 Posts
Originally Posted by 88_N/A_GXL
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.
Old 10-07-13, 10:02 PM
  #5  
Grabba Dabba Goo!
 
invinciblejets's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: murrells inlet sc
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yeah convertibles are slow....condition is the 280zx? 79 not most desirable year by any means..

post a link from cl
Old 10-08-13, 12:04 AM
  #6  
Senior Member

iTrader: (3)
 
88_N/A_GXL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Glenwood, Iowa
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
Old 10-08-13, 05:50 AM
  #7  
Full Member
Thread Starter
 
VasiliBrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: NC
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by invinciblejets
Yeah convertibles are slow....condition is the 280zx? 79 not most desirable year by any means.. post a link from cl
here is the CL link
http://greensboro.craigslist.org/cto/4113105922.html
Old 10-08-13, 06:18 AM
  #8  
Cake or Death?

iTrader: (2)
 
clokker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mile High
Posts: 10,249
Received 63 Likes on 53 Posts
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.
Old 10-08-13, 07:07 AM
  #9  
Full Member
Thread Starter
 
VasiliBrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: NC
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by clokker
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
Old 10-08-13, 07:23 AM
  #10  
Junior Member
 
BillD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Social Circle, GA
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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.
Old 10-08-13, 08:17 AM
  #11  
Full Member
Thread Starter
 
VasiliBrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: NC
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by BillD
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
Old 10-08-13, 08:49 AM
  #12  
Cake or Death?

iTrader: (2)
 
clokker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mile High
Posts: 10,249
Received 63 Likes on 53 Posts
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.
Old 10-08-13, 09:07 AM
  #13  
Moderator
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (3)
 
diabolical1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: FL
Posts: 10,923
Received 325 Likes on 286 Posts
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 ...

Originally Posted by clokker
I'd consider such a trade if it was a Z instead of a ZX.
this.

Originally Posted by clokker
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.
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.
Old 10-08-13, 09:56 AM
  #14  
Moderator
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (3)
 
j9fd3s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 31,145
Received 2,799 Likes on 1,981 Posts
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.
Old 10-08-13, 10:21 AM
  #15  
Grabba Dabba Goo!
 
invinciblejets's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: murrells inlet sc
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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
Old 10-08-13, 10:38 AM
  #16  
Dak
Information Regurgitator
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Dak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sparta TN. United States
Posts: 1,922
Received 184 Likes on 140 Posts
Originally Posted by clokker
The ZX engine is burdened with a shitton of useless/complicated emissions crap, earlier Zs have carbs.
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.
Old 10-08-13, 10:41 AM
  #17  
Junior Member

 
sportinct26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: california
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by invinciblejets
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
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
Old 10-08-13, 11:40 AM
  #18  
Moderator
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (3)
 
j9fd3s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 31,145
Received 2,799 Likes on 1,981 Posts
Originally Posted by invinciblejets
It looks to be in decent condition he already did the usdm ugly bumper delete
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
Old 10-08-13, 01:27 PM
  #19  
Ban Peak
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (49)
 
Molotovman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 4,040
Received 434 Likes on 279 Posts
Originally Posted by j9fd3s
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.
Old 10-08-13, 04:33 PM
  #20  
Cake or Death?

iTrader: (2)
 
clokker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mile High
Posts: 10,249
Received 63 Likes on 53 Posts
Originally Posted by sportinct26
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
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.
Old 10-08-13, 04:41 PM
  #21  
Grabba Dabba Goo!
 
invinciblejets's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: murrells inlet sc
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by j9fd3s
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
Lol true
Old 10-08-13, 05:03 PM
  #22  
Sharp Claws

iTrader: (30)
 
RotaryEvolution's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 5,107
Likes: 0
Received 47 Likes on 46 Posts
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.

Last edited by RotaryEvolution; 10-08-13 at 05:10 PM.
Old 10-21-13, 07:50 PM
  #23  
Full Member
Thread Starter
 
VasiliBrown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: NC
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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
Old 10-21-13, 08:20 PM
  #24  
Sharp Claws

iTrader: (30)
 
RotaryEvolution's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 5,107
Likes: 0
Received 47 Likes on 46 Posts
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.
Old 10-22-13, 12:35 AM
  #25  
Moderator
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (3)
 
j9fd3s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 31,145
Received 2,799 Likes on 1,981 Posts
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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:14 AM.