300zx vs. 240sx

A General Discussion forum for cars and other topics, and a great place to introduce yourself if you are new to NICO!
InsanityInc
Posts: 2521
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:43 am
Contact:

Post

The 300ZX will always handle better than a 240sx. Why? Lower center of gravity (on the chassis, not because the chassis is lower, though that's also true), and about a 15-20% wider wheelbase. Anyone who says "but the 240sx is lighter" gets smacked, because that means **** for peak roadholding so long as you're not overloading your tires.


User avatar
NoStickers
Posts: 840
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2003 5:00 pm
Car: 1991 240sx w/ sr (RIP)
1989 240sx w/ ka
1996 240sx donor car (coming soon)
Location: Ft. Bragg

Post

It doesn't sound like she will be racing her car unless its at the drag strip. For a daily driver I doubt anyone would really notice the difference in handling between the two unless they both have stock suspension.

User avatar
nsrZ32
Posts: 20795
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 8:27 am
Car: 90 Nissan 300ZX TT
78 Datsun 280Z
71 Datsun 521 Pickup
98 Nissan Sentra 2.0 SE
02 Nissan Altima 3.5 SE
01 Ford Focus S2
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Post

NoStickers wrote:It doesn't sound like she will be racing her car unless its at the drag strip. For a daily driver I doubt anyone would really notice the difference in handling between the two unless they both have stock suspension.
I've driven both stock vs. stock and my buddies swapped s13 with coilovers and lots of other suspension bits vs. several z32's (including mine) with coilovers and a whole slew of suspension mods.

No contest. Z32 handles better and its certainly noticable, period.

User avatar
NoStickers
Posts: 840
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2003 5:00 pm
Car: 1991 240sx w/ sr (RIP)
1989 240sx w/ ka
1996 240sx donor car (coming soon)
Location: Ft. Bragg

Post

nsrZ32 wrote:
I've driven both stock vs. stock and my buddies swapped s13 with coilovers and lots of other suspension bits vs. several z32's (including mine) with coilovers and a whole slew of suspension mods.

No contest. Z32 handles better and its certainly noticable, period.
I don't believe you. Maybe you should take a vacation, come to florida and let me drive your car.

namwons_240
Posts: 191
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 8:01 am
Car: 97' 200sx ser

Post

ok from reading the whole thread so far this is what ive gathered...6-10k max budget, 11-12 sec 1/4 mile, 240 or 300 and fun to drive. now my answers

u can get a swaped sr 240 for 5k, there all over now for some reason and with the remaining 5k if spent wisely can get u low 12 maybe 11's and around 350+ rwhp.

now the 300zx say u find a running one in good condition for 8k(which would be a ****in steal) u have 2k left...then what upgrade the turbo...oh yeah u need two so there goes the 2k...look under the hood on a ttzx, nightmare.

well theres my BIASED opinion...yes im biased to the 240 but what i stated is also fact.

User avatar
NoStickers
Posts: 840
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2003 5:00 pm
Car: 1991 240sx w/ sr (RIP)
1989 240sx w/ ka
1996 240sx donor car (coming soon)
Location: Ft. Bragg

Post

She said 6-10k on car and xx on mods. If money wasn't an issue and someone else was doing the work I'd say she should get a z32.

Kenrik
Posts: 5736
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:01 am
Car: Nissan 240SX Coupe
Infiniti G35 Coupe
Nissan Versa Hatch

Post

Welcome to Nico... got a boyfriend?

lol j/k

Seriously ..

The 240 is cheaper to modify and easier to work on.

The 300zx is a PITA to work on and parts are expensive but it is a "true" sports car


fluidmotion
Posts: 259
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:53 pm
Car: 1991 300zx TT, 1999 Miata, 1998 Audi A4, 2000 R1, 1996 FZR 600R

Post

I've got a S14 and a 300zx sitting at my house. Haven't driven the 300 really yet. The only driving I got with it made it seem a lot beefier (heavier and more powerful) than the s14.

I'm betting it really depends on what your looking for and your style of driving you want to do. You probably need to drive both and the driving experience is very different for both (with the short time I had in the 300) so you can probably easily decide from that.

btw, also in MN , not such a great place for cars, haha.

rousie13
Posts: 4106
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 5:55 pm
Car: 2006 Nissan 350z Track Edition, 1997 Ford F250 4X4
Location: Delaware, OH

Post

Ok my new idea for a good way to get "speed". Buy a bike and forget the whole car thing.....you'll have 11-12s stock, great handling and good stopping power.....bingo. I win for the best idea.

User avatar
nismofly
Posts: 12505
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2004 3:16 pm
Car: 89 Nissan 240SX Hatch

Post

she can buy looney's r1 so he can get an s2000

may even be able to ride it in a year or two

rousie13
Posts: 4106
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 5:55 pm
Car: 2006 Nissan 350z Track Edition, 1997 Ford F250 4X4
Location: Delaware, OH

Post

nismofly wrote:she can buy looney's r1 so he can get an s2000

may even be able to ride it in a year or two
Ding ding ding....we have a winner. She gets her 11-12s vehicle and he gets his S2k.

crzycav86
Posts: 3836
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 1:28 pm
Car: 93 Nissan 240SX KAT

Post

InsanityInc wrote:The 300ZX will always handle better than a 240sx. Why? Lower center of gravity (on the chassis, not because the chassis is lower, though that's also true), and about a 15-20% wider wheelbase. Anyone who says "but the 240sx is lighter" gets smacked, because that means **** for peak roadholding so long as you're not overloading your tires.
Although what you said may be true, weight transfer isn't everything when it comes to handling. So you can't really say 300zx>240sx in the handling department for all cases.

User avatar
gniknave
Posts: 4761
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 10:25 pm
Car: 2000 Audi A6 2.8 Quattro
2008 Honda Civic EX (Sedan)
Location: Newport, Kentucky

Post

Last year around this time I had the same debate. I wanted the 300zx, but when I had enough money to buy a 240, I went with it. I bought it for $500 fixed it up and drove it around for 3 months, then sold it for $3500. I turned a big profit on it, but still never got that Z32 fix.

I now drive a super sleeper Q45 (see sig). Anyway though, I look at it this way... You obviously want the Z32. Get it! If you don't like it, you can always sell it and buy a 240sx and still have some money left over.

User avatar
TachyonS14
Posts: 1432
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2003 11:11 pm

Post

I feel the 240sx is a better platform to fully mod simply by weight difference. The weight difference means the 240sx with the RIGHT mods will accelerate faster, brake faster, and handel better than a 300zx. That's just simple physics. Plus the 240sx is much cheaper to build, and much easier to work on. I love 300zx's, they are sweet rides. But the 240sx is better all around. I mean you can get a pretty modded 240sx for the price of a stock 300zx TT. The 240sx is the obvious choice here.

User avatar
Ajax
Posts: 1643
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2003 3:16 pm
Car: 1991 240sx SE
2010 Mazda 5

Post

Nismogirl3: if you are still reading this thread. Go out and drive one of each of the cars. Then you can make the choice for yourself and forget everyone else's opinion. Forget about the numbers game- find the car you enjoy driving and get it.

InsanityInc
Posts: 2521
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:43 am
Contact:

Post

crzycav86 wrote:Although what you said may be true, weight transfer isn't everything when it comes to handling. So you can't really say 300zx>240sx in the handling department for all cases.
How is weight transfer not everything when it comes to handling? That makes no sense.

Weight transfer IS everything when it comes to handling.

Why do you not want body roll? Because it increases weight transfer.

Why do you not want a high CG? Because it increases weight transfer.

Why do you not want a narrow track width? Because it increases weight transfer.

Why do you not want a floppy noodle chassis? Because it increases weight transfer.

The only thing that isn't weight transfer which relates to handling is straight tire grip, which is going to be equal between two cars with the same tires anyway.

crzycav86
Posts: 3836
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 1:28 pm
Car: 93 Nissan 240SX KAT

Post

InsanityInc wrote:How is weight transfer not everything when it comes to handling? That makes no sense.

Weight transfer IS everything when it comes to handling.

Why do you not want body roll? Because it increases weight transfer.

Why do you not want a high CG? Because it increases weight transfer.

Why do you not want a narrow track width? Because it increases weight transfer.

Why do you not want a floppy noodle chassis? Because it increases weight transfer.

The only thing that isn't weight transfer which relates to handling is straight tire grip, which is going to be equal between two cars with the same tires anyway.
You're partly wrong. The only thing that affects weight transfer is the height of the center of gravity, track width, weight, and amount of lateral force you apply.

Body roll changes the height of the center of gravity along the roll center, but this is not the main reason why body roll is bad. Body roll is bad because it dynamically changes the alignment settings.(ie: the outside wheel gains camber). A floppy chassis does not affect weight transfer to any significant degree, it just makes suspension less effective, and less predictable.

The other things I was referring to affecting handling is dynamic alignment change, and sprung-unsprung weight ratio.

This sounds like something you might want to post in suspension forum.

InsanityInc
Posts: 2521
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:43 am
Contact:

Post

crzycav86 wrote:Body roll changes the height of the center of gravity along the roll center, but this is not the main reason why body roll is bad. Body roll is bad because it dynamically changes the alignment settings.(ie: the outside wheel gains camber). A floppy chassis does not affect weight transfer to any significant degree, it just makes suspension less effective, and less predictable.
No, body roll and a floppy chassis most certainly do affect weight transfer. A floppy chassis just also affects suspension geometry.

The fact that you say body roll moves your Cg is proof in and of itself that it causes weight transfer. Say your center of gravity were located directly above your left wheels. Obviously all of the weight would be on one side of the car. Move it to the other side? The opposite. Weight transfer has occured.

Therefore, when your body rolls and moves the Cg left or right, it also changes the weight load on either side of the car, and thus: weight transfer.

A floppy chassis does the same thing, just the opposite way (and obviously not as dramatically).

Quote »The other things I was referring to affecting handling is dynamic alignment change, and sprung-unsprung weight ratio. [/quote]Dynamic alignment change between a 240sx and 300zx is pretty much a moot point because the suspensions are nearly identical. In actuality, the 300zx has a better front suspension. Unsprung weight doesn't vary too much either. It's not like we're comparing an all-around macphearson car with geo brakes to a live axled mustang with 6-piston brembos or something.

User avatar
Looneybomber
Posts: 9140
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2004 3:05 pm
Car: 02 explorer sprt (grn)
10 G37S (white)

Post

nismofly wrote:she can buy looney's r1 so he can get an s2000
BRILLIANT!!
rousie13 wrote:Ding ding ding....we have a winner. She gets her 11-12s vehicle and he gets his S2k.
It's actually hovering right around 10 flat if you can keep the front wheel down.

crzycav86
Posts: 3836
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 1:28 pm
Car: 93 Nissan 240SX KAT

Post

Well, I wasn't really talking about the 240sx vs 300zx thing anymore, now I'm talking about what affects weight transfer.

Quote »The fact that you say body roll moves your Cg is proof in and of itself that it causes weight transfer. [/quote]I know, and thats why I mentioned it. It's not significant compared to the factors I mentioned above.

Quote »A floppy chassis does the same thing, just the opposite way (and obviously not as dramatically).[/quote]Huh? ok. I'll take your word for it, since I haven't heard this.

Quote »Dynamic alignment change between a 240sx and 300zx is pretty much a moot point because the suspensions are nearly identical. In actuality, the 300zx has a better front suspension. Unsprung weight doesn't vary too much either. It's not like we're comparing an all-around macphearson car with geo brakes to a live axled mustang with 6-piston brembos or something.[/quote]Again, I'm talking about what affects handling in general.. not 240sx vs 300zx. You said weight transfer was everyting. I said unsprung weight and dynamic alignment change are important too. Who's right?

Anyway, what's your email address? I do not want to continue hijacking this thread.

InsanityInc
Posts: 2521
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:43 am
Contact:

Post

But the thing is, suspension geometry only has any bearing on tire grip, which I mentioned as the other part of handling, but also mentioned that between two fairly comparable cars, there really is no meaningful difference in that area.

rousie13
Posts: 4106
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 5:55 pm
Car: 2006 Nissan 350z Track Edition, 1997 Ford F250 4X4
Location: Delaware, OH

Post

Looneybomber wrote:BRILLIANT!!

It's actually hovering right around 10 flat if you can keep the front wheel down.
Hmm.....I wonder what my bike runs.

User avatar
nismogirl3
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 10:47 am

Post

So what it comes down to, is that since I have pretty much no experience with building up a car, a 240 would be the better one for me to start on. BUT, then theres the fact that my brother would do anything I couldnt handle for me for the 300. I guess I'll just have to keep looking around at both of them, and when I find a steal, grab it...I love the 300zx, but I know the 240sx would be extremely fun...

You're all saying that the 300 would have better handle to it, but the 240 I could get a lot more for my money.

Honestly, I'm glad I came here. You guys have been a real help.

Oh, and if I DID get a bike (which isn't on my agenda at the moment) I'd have to go for a aprilia rsv 1000r or a ducati 749r

nismogirl3

xyster
Posts: 2059
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 4:09 am
Car: '00 Prelude

Post

nismogirl3 wrote:Oh, and if I DID get a bike (which isn't on my agenda at the moment) I'd have to go for a aprilia rsv 1000r or a ducati 749r

nismogirl3
I hope you're rich, or just love working on bikes. And that's coming from a Triumph owner...

crzycav86
Posts: 3836
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 1:28 pm
Car: 93 Nissan 240SX KAT

Post

If you want experience, get a 240. You won't learn much if your brother does all the work. So get something you can work on.

DriftingJesus
Posts: 2214
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 5:04 pm

Post

Look at my sig!!!!! and click the link

zerothread?id=160743

One_Love
Posts: 8921
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 1:56 pm
Car: 1995 nissan 240sx

Post

wo wo wo jesus, i never said that in your sig

User avatar
Flicktitty
Posts: 4253
Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2004 11:56 am
Car: 1989 Nissan 240sx 2JZ-GTE Swapped
1994 Toyota Supra
2019 Lexus GX460
1992 Lexus SC400

Post

300ZX FTW! no question!

DriftingJesus
Posts: 2214
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 5:04 pm

Post

Right Right well aleast I am now a boxer

User avatar
gniknave
Posts: 4761
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 10:25 pm
Car: 2000 Audi A6 2.8 Quattro
2008 Honda Civic EX (Sedan)
Location: Newport, Kentucky

Post

Can you really pass on a 300zxtt for a 240sx? Seriously?


Return to “General Chat”