Guest Anonymous Posted November 22, 2001 Share Posted November 22, 2001 The reason why I'm wondering is because I've driven many cars equipped with rear multilinks mostly the early 90's Nissan cars and to this very day the best handling cars I've driven were a '91 M3 and a '91 240SX hatchback. Although the 240SX has been a rather forgettable line of cars in the States, it's a very well-mannered car, very tossable and steering feel was very good. It's almost shocking how a possible conversion to the 240SX multilink hasn't been mentioned here before. My own project Z is underway and I've covered the engine, turbo and just about everything else except the rear suspension. My logic behind this swap is that 1) there plenty of 240SX's in wreckage yards that could donate parts 2) I have twin turbo 300ZX calipers I could use with the 240SX IRS and with some redrilling of the rotors could use the Powerstop rotors that I have. Anyone else think this would make for an interesting swap? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted November 22, 2001 Share Posted November 22, 2001 Typo alert: I meant 95 M3 not 91 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted November 22, 2001 Share Posted November 22, 2001 Funny you should mention that, I've been thinking about the exact same thing. As a 240SX owner I would like to second that. These cars have excellent handling and grip, Very fun to drive around. And like sopdadope said, they're relatively common around junkyards and shouldn't be too expensive, furthermore, they've got A HUGE aftermarket for suspension pieces. And I don't think their track is much wider than a 1st gen Z... The main problems that I see are that the struts probably angle differently, and the 240SX IRS comes with its own subframe, and would take quite a bit of modification to mount it on the Z chassis. I don't even know if it would physically fit under there... although I would be very curious if someone were to attempt this swap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueovalz Posted November 22, 2001 Share Posted November 22, 2001 Another plus is that the 240SX has a nearly identical rear end as the 300ZX. An R230 swap is as simple as changing the differential stubs to match the 240SX shafts. Again, the subframe is a bit wide and perhaps bulky to fit, but there is always a way to get around this (I should think). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted November 22, 2001 Share Posted November 22, 2001 I could have sworn the Z32 had an R200 and not an R230... I've read up on quite a few LSD conversions for the SX, and here are a couple links for anyone interested. http://www.240sx.org/links/installs/lsd/lsd.htm http://www.240sx.org/links/installs/lsd2/index.htm And Terry I see the link to your page is broken as has been broken for a while Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted November 22, 2001 Share Posted November 22, 2001 I loved the handling of 240SX's. It's a shame Nissan slapped in a truck engine instead of the SR20DET they get in Japan. No wonder the Silvia is such a beloved car over there, it's got the 240SX's handling but with better balance, breaks and motor!!! Another cool gizmo was the HICAS 4-wheel steering. It also works very well in the Q but in the case of the 300ZX the HICAS was more of a hindrance I thought, coming out of turns had this somewhat vague feeling in the TT but I guess owners get used to it and use it to their advantaged. Nissan really perfected the HICAS in the 240SX, I remember I busted a U down a 2 lane street no prob and I really thought that car had probably the tighest turning radius, at least of all the cars I drove, neck and neck with the puny CRX! Now I haven't taken a good luck at the 240SX IRS but it looks like some serious machining of the subframe will be involved. I think a good half inch or so would have to be shaved off. That would leave little room for clearance between the lower arm and the diff case but we'll see. The track looks like it should be fine, after all these cars are really about the same size. If the SX happens to be wider it would be hard to shorten the arms and rods. I've done some serious investigation of the 240SX, 300ZX and Q45 rear suspensions and it baffles me how these three cars, aimed at three different markets, with half a ton of weight difference between the 240SX and the Q and yet they're multilinks are fundamentally the same. The similarities between the components really work out in favor of 240SX's owners because the differentials from the Q and Z are interchangeable with the SX. Brakes are interchangeable as well as long as you drill the rotors from the Z perfectly to match the SX's bolt pattern. At this point it's really just a thought, but a serious one. If I were to ahead with this there would be some challenges but it's definitely doable. The rewards: I can only imagine how well the handling would be in a car 400 pounds lighter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tannji Posted July 21, 2003 Share Posted July 21, 2003 BUMP! I was wondering if this idea has been pursued anyfurther by anyone. I have a 91 240SX available to me for $300. (no Title) I have a good Jaguar shop locally that specializes in this type of thing, and I am thinking about approaching him on this topic, anyone have anything to add to the topic before I do?? tannji Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Jarvis Posted July 22, 2003 Share Posted July 22, 2003 my car is a full tube frame. I stuck the subframe under the stock unibody, and it seemed to me that the front a-arm mount would try to occupy the same space as the "frame rail" where it curves up behind the tool storage. As for the reasons for doing it, mine have mostly already been mentioned, but modern suspension, easy LSD, easy disks, easy 5 lug conversion, lots of parts available. Of course easy is relative, but when you are doing a tube and all you have to work out are the subframe mounts..... I will try to get some pics and post when I have them. Jason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tannji Posted July 22, 2003 Share Posted July 22, 2003 Excellent! I would appreciate that. Did it appear to you to be impossible, very difficult, or impractical to do the 240SX swap? (without a tube frame, that is = ) I have a guy that can do the conversion, no matter what the difficulty, but his difficulty translates into difficulty for my wallet, in a very linear fashion! It turns out that I cant use very much of the 240SX on my 240Z, unless I go that route. I wasnt looking to get into that level of engineering and fabrication... but it seems to me that the rewards could be very nice indeed. I want to know what your car feels like and handles like.... but with a tubular frame, I would imagine that we dont have very many common points between our two cars. Can you estimate the difference, as far as cornering, traction, and braking? thanks again, tannji Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zxgts-4 Posted July 23, 2003 Share Posted July 23, 2003 Go to my Personal Gallery i have put up a pic I took while testing out this theory on my spare 280 ZX if the susp cage is narrowed about 40mm on rhs and you use 2 left driveshafts & 40mm offset wheels you end up with 1420mm track. you need to change oval top arms to straight ones to clear strut and extend front cage mounts using existing 280ZX front mounts. Later S14-15 have 3.69 & 3.9 Diff ratios. Looks doable to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Jarvis Posted July 24, 2003 Share Posted July 24, 2003 Probably possible, I would want some type of reinforcement if I notched the "rails" where it seemed to me to be needed. As far as driving impressions, I wish I could. I am so far from driving it I don't like to think about it. One thing that you will need to think about, and all of this is from memory, but I think the rear track on the S13 is only about 3" wider than the s30, but the S13 uses FWD offset wheels. I have Z32 wheels on mine right now (just rolling it around) and there is only about 1/32 of clearance for the front wheels. My point is that I plan to use RWD offset wheels all around, but it wll get fairly wide n the rear. I think I am about to order a set of YZ flares from John Washington. Did you mention, are you wanting to try this on a Z or ZX ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Jarvis Posted July 24, 2003 Share Posted July 24, 2003 Did you mention' date=' are you wanting to try this on a Z or ZX ?[/quote'] I see, 240Z, sorry..... BTW, you might be right about not being able to use a lot from the 240SX if you don't do this type of conversion, but when you are doing what I am doing, that is loking for modern replacements for some of the Z's systems, you realize how similar the cars are, just 30 years apart so not a lot of interchange. I think you can use the throttle body though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zxgts-4 Posted July 24, 2003 Share Posted July 24, 2003 yes I was talking 280ZX. Probably would be almost bolt in on Z31 because of similarity between it & SX. SX and Skyline appear to have same track, Z32 is 1535mm and uses a 4 bolt bracket for front diff mount. I have other pics but personal gallery pics too small for detail. As for front wheel offset maybe use Z31 or SX stuts and hubs. I woundn't go cutting arms as too easy to lose geometry. I wanted the deep wheels so have stayed with normal 280ZX 2 but swapped in the viscous LSD and am just organising shorter driveshafts. Neil 8) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Jarvis Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 Yeah, that is what I have done, 86 300ZX turbo hubs up front, so an easy 5 lug. But the Z32 wheels barely clear the strut. So barely that a clamp on weight on the inside of the rim hits the strut body. Obviously not acceptable for driving, but it looks pretty cool to roll it around ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Jarvis Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 yes I was talking 280ZX. Probably would be almost bolt in on Z31 because of similarity between it & SX. Oh, I haven't spen much time under a Z31, but I think the Z31 and S13 are quite different. The S13 was the first car (as far as I know) in the US to use the rear cradle design that carried Nissan RWD cars through the 90's. Todays design is very similar too (Z33 etc.) but not bolt compatible as I understand it. You are correct on the similarities between the Skyline and the 240SX, the Z32 and J30 were very similar too. - Jason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zxgts-4 Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 Early S13 has the same 2 trailing arm suspension as Z31 thats why I thought it may be a relatively straight forward swap. One of the parts guys I spoke to said that the early S13 cars had dimples marked on body where multi-link would mount, but haven't seen it myself. Neil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H. Garcia Posted July 25, 2003 Share Posted July 25, 2003 I'm working right now on this particular setup, using a complete z32 rear end. I have the car on the rotisserie and proceding to measure everything to modify the rear chasis of the car to accept the new rear suspension. I'll try to post pictures next week of the suspension in position on the car HG 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.