1976 vs 1978 280Z 2+2

[geant90]

So I have two purchase opportunities. I know the difference is the larger fuel tank in the later, as well as space saver spare. I do plan on doing a V8 swap eventually so would that smaller fuel tank affect me enough to make an unwise decision? Any thoughts please do share.

[tecreatta]

Buy the one with less rust.

[NewZed]

...so would that smaller fuel tank affect me enough to make an unwise decision? Any thoughts please do share.

No advice can be given unless the distance between gas stations and your projected gas mileage is known.  And don't forget to factor in the 50 mph limit with the space-saver tire.

[geant90]

Thanks for the replies guy. And there both in really good shape. I have my eyes on a 1978 but the guy is too attached to it giving it a higher value. I would like the 78 due to me planing to use it as a daily driver on nice warm days after I do an engine swap. That is why I want the bigger tank but I'm not sure if it'll make such a big difference. NewZed of course after I blow a tire I won't go doing anything crazy with a skinny bicycle tire on my precious baby. It is to get me home safe without breaking the bank.

[NewZed]

Of course, you're aware that the 2+2 and the coupe look different, and have different dimensions (wheelbase, length, etc.), and weights.

 

Unless you're comparing two 2+2's.

 

If so, the 78 has better window regulators.  The early ones tend to be high maintenance and don't always work well.  Rust and interior quality would be concerns.  Interior parts are hard to come by.

Edited April 16, 2014 by NewZed

[geant90]

Yes both are 2+2 by preference. <3 So the 76 and 78 models have different window regulators? I was assuming such a small feature would have compatible parts. 

[NewZed]

If you look at the cars in person, roll the windows up and down.  You'll notice the difference.  A small consideration but very aggravating when they break.  Especially if the AC doesn't work or doesn't exist.  At least, it's a negotiating point.

[rags]

There are many improvements that the 78 will have over the 76. Windows, door strikers, wiring and overall chassis stiffness by improved design are a few. For a V8 car, I would definitely choose the 78.

 

Joe

[EvilC]

Where in the Bronx are you? I live there Gunhill Rd area.

 

Like Rags said - go with the 78 and check EVERYWHERE for rust.

[geant90]

I'm on KingsBridge Terrace right on the SW side of the reservoir. I can really use a lot of guidance if you have the time on cell or in person EvilC.

[NewZed]

Don't late 74 through 78 have the same chassis/body?  Didn't know that Nissan made more improvements in stiffness, unless the mods for the gas tank count.

 

Add improved and cheaper rear wheel brake cylinders for 78.  Dual piston versus sliding body cylinders.  ~$20 versus ~$50 each.

[rags]

Ever try to use a 77-78 door on an earlier car? How about a lower rad support? That won't work either. IMO the 77-78 chassis is a much superior chassis for stiffness than the early cars.

 

Joe

[NewZed]

I was just looking for examples.  Door and radiator support fit?  I don't see the chassis stiffness connection.  Not arguing, just trying to learn some new things...

[AdreView]

Like tecreatta said, go with the one with less rust.  The overall sheet metal condition will be the biggest factor in actually getting to drive either one of these safely on the road.

 

For example, all original, running, rebuild motor, est 180,000 miles on the chassis.  Picked up for under $3500.00

 

 

 

 

This is my '78 2+2, this was taken yesterday, just pulled off 95% of the factory sound deadening which is the only way to determine if rust or holes in my case lie below.

 

 

As you can see, drivers side was patched by previous owner:

 

 

 

Passenger side which previously showed no signs of rust prior to pulling the deadening....surprise!!!

 

 

Hole in floor board directly into solid frame rail:

 

[NewZed]

 I do plan on doing a V8 swap eventually 

Make sure it runs well.  Eventually can take a long time.

[rags]

I was just looking for examples.  Door and radiator support fit?  I don't see the chassis stiffness connection.  Not arguing, just trying to learn some new things...

 

Those were just 2 examples of how the early cars differ from the later cars. One example that clearly shows how the 77-78 cars are made more structurally sound is how the seats are mounted. The later cars seat mounts are boxed from the trans tunnel to the rocker boxes. If you really want to see how how much more metal is used in the 77-78 cars, just weigh a stripped car. I don't have an exact figure but I do know that the 77-78 cars are substantially heavier that the 70-76 cars. I have stripped both. IMO, Nissan would only make the cars heavier to make them stronger.

 

Joe

[NewZed]

Seems reasonable.  Although, the heavier bumpers don't make the body stiffer.  They were added for other reasons.  Side impact crash improvements can add weight with little affect on stiffness.  If boxed seat mounts in a 78 adds stiffness it seems like boxing a 76's seat mounts would be worth doing.  Or even the early pre-75 S30's.

 

Makes for interesting discussion.  Worth considering.

[rags]

Bumpers would not be part of this discussion as I was speaking solely about a stripped shell. But now that you mention it, the heavier bumper do in fact make those bumpers stiffer than a 240 bumper, don't they?

[NewZed]

The probably do.  Weld the shock absorbers so they don't move and stiffness probably goes up even more.  Plus they keep the front end down for drag-racing.

 

We might be starting a trend back to 280Z bumpers, for stiffness!  I knew there was a reason to like my old bench bumpers.