240 vs. 260 vs. 280

[Guest Anonymous]

Hey, this is my first post around here. I have been wondering around HybridZ for a little while and now I'm seriously thinking about buying a Z and working on it as my first project car.

 

What I am wondering is which handles the best? 240 260 or 280Z? I know the cars get progresively heavier but I wasn't sure if that was from added frame support or what.

 

Thanks!

Martin

[johnc]

Some people would argue that the 240 is a better handler because of its lighter weight but they forget that the early cars were stuck with 4.5" and 5" wide rims. Later 280s had 6" wide rims. Once you start qualifying your question with things like, "...assuming they have the same width rims..." then you've opened a Pandora's box of mods.

 

Also, what kind of "handling" are you talking about? Street driving, drag race, autocross, road race, LSR? I think this is one of those rehtorical questions that depends on a person's viewpoint, biases, etc.

 

BTW... my 1970 240Z is the best handling Z out there...

[Guest Anonymous]

The weight difference was somewhat structural I think on the 280's, but for the most part it was all done for safety reasons, the bumpers along add up to alot of the extra weight, along with side impact channels etc. As John said, depends on what your doing. I would imagine the later cars would be somewhat stiffer, a little less nimble and even despite the larger motor wouldn't be much if any faster (maybe slower if anything, hard to read much into HP figures of the cars really unless you do a power to weight ratio on each model etc IMHO).

 

Neither car truthfully without a major suspension upgrade is going to be scaring a skidpan anytime soon with a 1g lateral acceleration. All the models can be pretty decent corner carvers with the right mods though and its the typical formula that always works on nearly every car. Stiffer coil over springs, sway bars and stiffer dampened shock. Auxillary was giving rides this weekend showing the Tokico Illumina 5 way adjustables, amazing how stiff they change from 1 to 5, unreal, expensive, but theres no question they make a difference. (Glue your dentures in good though... ).

 

Regards,

 

Lone

[Guest Anonymous]

I would be going for overall handling, more street/sutocross type set up with the ability to go and do a quick 1/4. In an early 240Z would a roll cage be comprible to the later Stuctural improvments? I think a roll cage would definatly be in the cards with any car. Also would how much extra structure would be needed for the torque put out by a Chevy SBC... just some ideas

[Dan Baldwin]

Absolutely no question about it, start with a 240Z. Ask anybody who's tried to race a 280Z in ITS. More weight on the same tires => slower cornering speeds. Longer braking distances, too. It's a hell of a lot easier to start with a lightweight car than to try to remove it from an overweight car. My 240Z (not stripped, BTW) without the spare but with a roll bar weighs less than 2300 lb. empty. 280Z is more like 2700 lb. AFAIK, '73 was the year things started going to hell.

 

Don't settle for anything other than a '69 - '72 240Z.

[Guest Anonymous]

I say just go for the one you like the best. We all know the yare good car's and all. But we can only help so much becuase we're not gonna be driving the car.

[Pop N Wood]

These guys are probably right. The early 240's are lighter and probably handle better (all else being equal).

 

As far as which car to start with, it probably doesn't matter. Just get the cheapest, rust free car you can find. They all have their pluses and minuses and in the end it turns out to be a wash. The early 240's are lighter and, being older, have less legal restrictions on them (smog and bumpers). However they are older and harder to find. The early 240's are also achieving some collectors appeal. All of this makes it more difficult (and expensive) to find a rust free one. They are also not as stiff and hence flex more. My 70 has paint cracks in the C pillars near the rear hatch.

 

The 260/280's are heavier, but propbably a better starting point for a V8 conversion. Not all of that weight was bumpers. The chassis are stiffer. The 280's also start with an R200 rear (a necessary upgrade for a V8) and are a LOT more common. The early 240's have smaller brake boosters which cannot be upgraded due to the positioning of the clutch slave cylinder. There are big differences in the engines, but none of that matters for a V8 conversion.

 

But I can't stress enough, try to start with a rust free chassis BEFORE you establish an emotional attachment to the car. Otherwise you might be looking at an 11 year project car.

[Guest Anonymous]

Thanx for the information. From what was said I think maybe a 240 with lots of structural help (Strut braces, sway bars, roll cage. any others?) would be pretty good. I just have to find a rust free one now. At least I live in Colorado where cars don't rust to quickly.

 

Martin

[pparaska]

Even a 280Z is not that stiff. Add subframe connectors to a 240Z and it will be as stiff or stiffer than a 280Z, in my estimation. Check out my site under "Structural Mods" for plans for subframe connectors. If you do that and add a cage that ties well into the towers front and rear, you will have a "brick" that's probably still less than most 280Zs and much stiffer.

 

Power to weight, Baby!

 

Finding a 240Z may be more difficult, but you'll have fewer smog law problems with one, and you won't have to swap the ugly bumpers like you would on a 77-78. The R200 swap is so simple, it's not even worth worrying about on a hi-po 240Z project. It's a simple bolt in with a mustache bar and maybe a rear cross brace if the 240Z is a 70-71.

 

Sorry , I'm partial to the 240Z styling (interior and exterior). I say start with a lighter version if you're trying to build a high power/weight ratio car. If you take the car into the 11s (not difficult with a V8 or a turbo 6), then you'll need to put a roll bar in anyway, and a cage is not far from that. The handling and braking aspect follows along the same lines with lower weight.

[260DET]

The vented bonnet on my '77 is way heavier than earlier non-vented bonnets, which is a bit silly seeing that it is not a structural part. Another thing I've run across is that the strut tubes on the '77 are slightly larger in diameter and heavier in gauge than early models.

[zero]

somebody said something about a skidpad, and now im curious. I know that Z's handle well, does anyone have one of those G-tech gizmoes and know how many g's there stock or modified z can pull, and if so list your suspension mods and tires. thanks alot

[Guest Anonymous]

I'de also be curious to what kind of G's a early Z car could put down. .87 maybe? more hopefully Just to have a number to compare to other cars out there would be nice.

[johnc]

Again, do you guys want skidpad numbers for a stock 240Z with 4.5" wide wheels?

 

That brings me back to my original point - this is a meaningless question unless you are comparing absolutely stock vehicles. When you start allowing mods into this discussion then the old qualifier "all things being equal" is NEVER true.

 

My 1970 BSP 240Z on an asphalt autocross course regularly pulled 1.2gs steady state and 1.7gs transient lateral using 225/50-15 Kumho V700s as measured by a Palm Vx based Geez system. So what? There's only one car configured that way at that time.

 

I can also build a 280Z that will probably pull 1.5gs steady state and over 1.9gs transient. To do the same in a 240Z I would probably have to put a full roll cage in because the chassis is not stiff enough. Without the cage I'd bet that you couldn't keep a 240Z in a steady state turn near 1.5gs without sawing at the wheel and throwing off the measurement.

 

IMHO... For a street V8 conversion, assuming smog laws don't impact the decision, I would go with a 280Z chassis. Its stronger to begin with, has provisions for EFI, comes with an R200, and is easier and cheaper to find. Weight is not as big an issue for a street driven car.

[Pop N Wood]

I guess the thread got carried away from the original question.

 

Yeah, the question of "which handles better" needs such a long list of qualifiers that it probably does become meaniningless. But if the question is morphed into "starting with which chassis will allow me to build the better handling machine", then it becomes one more pertainent to this site. The question I turned this thread toward was "which chassis, with heavy modification, will allow me to build the best handling V8 Z".

[260DET]

John's suggestion has a lot going for it. Then if you want to knock a bit of weight off, use a fibreglass bonnet and a similar hatch with a plexiglass 'glass'. Reducing your relatively 'high up' weight like that has an additional handling benefit, too.

[Dan Baldwin]

Absolutely no way increased chassis stiffness will increase steady state cornering grip from

1.2 to 1.5g. Conceivable that it could increase transient from 1.7 to 1.9, though. If that

chassis stiffness increase comes by way of an additional 400 lb. weight, you can expect

some loss of cornering gs due to that, more loss than the gain would offset I'd bet.

 

240Zs corner better than 280Zs on the same tires, chassis stiffness be damned (not that I

believe a 280Z's chassis is much, if any, stiffer).

 

As far as "all things being equal", they pretty much are as far as 240Z vs. 280Z suspension

and tire size potential. No question 240Zs are faster on the track, despite having less hp.

Adding chassis stiffness to a 240Z doesn't require a 400 lb. weight gain. It HAS to be a

much better starting point for building a performance car. Fiberglass hood and plexiglass

"glass" gives similar weight reduction to 240Z as 280Z. Easy choice, 400 lb. lighter is faster.

[Pop N Wood]

Just for the record, the early 240 motors have a higher horsepower rating than any of the subsequent non-turbo models.

[Pop N Wood]

Also I want to kick back a few more ideas on this.

 

Yes, the 280 chassis are probably not much stiffer. But I have never seen paint cracks on the C pillars of a 280, nor have I heard people complain about the front sway bar damaging the frame rails on a 280. These things reinforce what the JTR guy says, not all of the 280 weight gain was dead weight.

 

Now does any of this matter if a cage is installed? No. But then as Johnc says you have completely changed the question.

 

And yes, the R200 swap is cake, but it does represent an added expense that must be planned for.

 

Thus you need to take all of the above into account when selecting a project car. Styling, smog restrictions, starting weight, rear end, cost, condition, availablitiy and most importantly intended use all need to be considered when deciding which vehicle to buy.

 

But I still maintain that if you are going to build a V8 Z, then the cost-condition-availability concerns will override any pros and cons of 240 vs 280. If the body is rust free and the suspension/driveline fairly complete, then be happy and go for it.

[Dan Baldwin]

240Z's were rated at 150 GROSS hp. More like 121 SAE net. 280Z was ~136 SAE net. Stock vs. stock, the 280Z has more hp. Structurally, the front sway bar mount issue is easily addressed. I ran long bolts through the frame rails, with a plate on top. Used nylock nuts, otherwise you just squish the rails. Additional weight: maybe 1 lb. Haven't seen the dreaded C-pillar cracks. I did about 15 track days before I installed a roll bar in '99, maybe 21 track days since. Roll bar weight: 50 lb., probably well worth it.

 

Myself, if I'd bought a 280Z instead of a 240Z, I KNOW the additional weight would be absolutely bugging the hell out of me every time I went to the track. For a high performance street car, I'd agree that cost/condition/availability are relatively important. For a street/track or track-only car, I'd only consider a '70-'72 240Z. Again, that's ME.

[Pop N Wood]

I knew the issue of gross vs. net HP would come up. That is why I made certain to add the "rating" qualifier. If 150 Gross HP maps into 120 SAE, then I will take your word for it. I guess the next step would be to determine what year they switched HP ratings and compare the 240's to 280's year by year....

 

The point is the 240's held their own in HP. Later year Z's went to larger displacements to try to offset the losses in performance due to smog equipment and weight gain.

 

So yeah, if you are building a balls out, no compromise vehicle where cost is no issue OR if you are in the enviable position of selecting between a 240 and a 280 that are otherwise comparable, then by all means go for the 240. But I sure as hell wouldn't pay a preimium for a rusted out 240 shell that is going to take tons of body work. A 280 is simply not a bad starting point. Put the extra money and time into a better engine, better tires or more trick suspension pieces.