Guest Anonymous Posted November 26, 2002 Share Posted November 26, 2002 g'day i race a 240z with l28 here in Australia F54 etc I want to build a 280z for historic racing but we did not ever get the American Version only 280zx. can some members give me info on the factory spec 280? Also as i have to run relatively un modified is it possible to streamline and improve factory EFI ? thanks Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted November 26, 2002 Share Posted November 26, 2002 I believe stock 280z is 170hp @ redline. Dont know about torque or accel, or quarter mile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SleeperZ Posted November 26, 2002 Share Posted November 26, 2002 Actually, I believe the peak power is 149hp and it is made at 5600 rpm -- the redline is 6400 rpm. The peak torque is 163 ft/lb at 4400 rpm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
280z-racer Posted November 27, 2002 Share Posted November 27, 2002 STOCK HP IS 170 AT 5600 RPM AND TORQUE IS 177 AT 4400 RPM. 1/4 MILE IS IN THE LOW 16'S I BELIEVE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted November 28, 2002 Share Posted November 28, 2002 http://www.geocities.com/z-car/specs/ says 149, though on the engine bay it says different things. my 260 says something like 164 hp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bastaad525 Posted December 1, 2002 Share Posted December 1, 2002 heheh I love it when guys quote the earlier GROSS hp ratings of 170hp.... man we all WISH the L28 was pumping out 170hp GROSS, guys.... that 170 was GROSS, 135-145 NET was what the L28 was actually putting out when it was in the car with all accessories connected... this came out to about 110hp at the wheels, by the way... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest silverbullet Posted December 1, 2002 Share Posted December 1, 2002 Originally posted by bastaad525:heheh I love it when guys quote the earlier GROSS hp ratings of 170hp.... man we all WISH the L28 was pumping out 170hp Why not use flywheel power ratings? It seems that is all everyone else is using nowadays for bragging rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted December 1, 2002 Share Posted December 1, 2002 > Why not use flywheel power ratings? And which measurement method would we used? Horsepower is basically an imaginary number derived via torque with this calculation: bhp = torque x rpm/5252 Being an imaginary number there are various methods of calculating it, with some methods more precise then others. Until 1972 most US auto manufacturers used an old SAE standard method develop to the so-called "gross" horsepower numbers. This standard was designed to measure the horsepower output of the basic block, cylinder head, and internals. The standard did not specify intake, exhuast, and accessory configurations. In 1972 the state of California, as part of their Clean Air act implementation, required all auto manufacturers to specify horsepower ratings using the SAE J245 (now SAE J1349 and J1995) standard. Somewhere the term "net" was thrown in by the automotive marketing folks, but there's nothing "net" about that standard. It measures crank horsepower with the engine as configured in the car including complete exhaust and intake systems. Recently a lot of people have been quoting "Wheel" horsepower numbers. These numbers are even more imprecise then the old "Gross" horsepower numbers from years ago because there is no set, agreed upon standard for their measurement. Each of the chassis dyno companies (Mustang, Dyno-Jet, etc.) appear to generate horsepower numbers based on their own, proprietary process and algorithms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted December 1, 2002 Share Posted December 1, 2002 My old silver Z has 200 stock horsepower despite what the factory claims. 200 is an easy number to remember. I arrived at the 200 figure by the seat of my pants after I polished the valve cover / removed the air filter LOL Remember, historically horsepower was based upon how much a four legged horse could pull.( and I have 200 of em chomping at the bit under that silver hood0. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Posted December 1, 2002 Share Posted December 1, 2002 You tell'em Tomahawk! I can confirm the accuracy of that statement. As long as you remember to include the "WOW" factor. For example HP increases after a car wash or wax job! On a serious note; BPH@RPM 149@5,600 Torque @ RPM 163 @ 4,400 6/75 Road and Track: 0-60 MPH 9.4 sec. 1/4 mile 17.3 sec. top speed 119 fuel economy 19.5 curb weight 2,875 wheelbase 90.7 Len Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pop N Wood Posted December 1, 2002 Share Posted December 1, 2002 Horsepower is basically an imaginary number ... ???? Horsepower has a well defined meaning, work per unit time. Agree there are many different ways to measure it, but it is a measure of a physical entity. It is very real. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PETEW Posted December 2, 2002 Share Posted December 2, 2002 OK, wait a minute here. According to those Specs the 280Z is actually HEAVIER than the 280ZX. I always thought the ZX was a 3000lb car and the 280Z was a 2700lb car. Is that really correct? If it is I am not happy about that. Although I stripped a ton of weight of my 280Z when I got rid of the bumpers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Posted December 2, 2002 Share Posted December 2, 2002 Pete I know sounds wrong but I got it out of "Datsun/Nissan sports car buyers guide" by John Matras. On pg. 49 On pg 58 it says 79 280zx curb weight 2825 lbs. wheelbase 91.3 BPH @RPM 135 @ 5,200 Torque @rpm 144 @ 4,400rpm 0-60 mph 9.2 sec 1/4 mile 17.2 sec. top speed 121 mph fuel enconomy 22mpg so according to road and track magizine (what he got the information from the zx is 50lbs lighter than the 280z. But also it says on pg. 60. The 1981 280zx Turbo weight was 2,995 BPH 180 @ 5,600rpm 0-60 mph 7.4 sec. 1/4 mile 15.6 sec. top speed 129 fuel enconomy 20 mpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo2001 Posted December 2, 2002 Share Posted December 2, 2002 There are also 2 different 280z too if you want to get technical. 75-76 with heavy chrome bumper and 77-78 with lighter bumpers and lighter bumper shocks. (they are still heavy) 77-78 also had a bigger gas tank too I think so the wet curb weight, it'll be little bit heavier than dry weight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Posted December 2, 2002 Share Posted December 2, 2002 Good point. The 280z I quoted was the 75 280z. Didn"t have info. at hand on later models Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudge Posted December 2, 2002 Share Posted December 2, 2002 Originally posted by johnc:These numbers are even more imprecise then the old "Gross" horsepower numbers from years ago because there is no set, agreed upon standard for their measurement. Each of the chassis dyno companies (Mustang, Dyno-Jet, etc.) appear to generate horsepower numbers based on their own, proprietary process and algorithms. Lack of standards = more accurate? Or was that a typo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bastaad525 Posted December 2, 2002 Share Posted December 2, 2002 Yes it's true some 280z's did weigh more than some 280zx's. I always love the reaction I got when I told people my 'big fat' 280zx was probably a couple hundred pounds lighter than their 'light little' 280z Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PETEW Posted December 3, 2002 Share Posted December 3, 2002 Oh well. Like I said I took off the bumpers of my '77 280Z so that should save some weight. I just like th look of the Z more than the ZX. The Z's suspension is a better design, too, and that will mean alot to me when I do track days. I'll have to take it to a grainery and get it weighed when I am done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo2001 Posted December 3, 2002 Share Posted December 3, 2002 Actually, the zx has better suspension also. but it is longer so it might not handle as good as Z. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted December 3, 2002 Share Posted December 3, 2002 > Lack of standards = more accurate? Or was that a typo. Lack of standards not = more accurate. I guess that paragraph was a bit obtuse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.