Rolling Parts Posted February 27, 2010 Share Posted February 27, 2010 The use of a semi trailing arm suspension should be kept in its historical context, at the time it was state of the art for a volume production car. Just look the suspension systems other comparable cars were using at the time. As for being cheap, solid leaf sprung rear axles were cheap, where is the evidence to say it cost less to build a semi trailing arm suspension than the McPherson strut type? If there is any more knocking of semi trailing arm suspension I'll link that BMW tarmac rally video, again Historically, the "Z car" had used a Chapman strut rear end. They CHANGED that in the ZX for reasons that were not because of performance. That did away with the unique Chapman struts to minimize parts counts between product lines. Just like the 810 sedan got the 6 cylinder engine from the Z, the ZX now got the rear suspension from the 810 sedan. The rear trailing arms are not bad, but they were done for cost savings and DID warrant attention because of their tendency to "squat" under hard acceleration and "steer" under hard breaking in a turn. That tendency actually gets much worse with wear/age. Those tendencies are the "why" they can be addressed with stiffer springs, re-valved shocks, and/or stiffer bushings. If you KNOW how to drive, it's not really an issue. Since the 280ZXT was on the street, it's not uncommon for manufacturers try to tame the "surprises" out of a car for the uninitiated. Hitting the brakes HARD in a turn in a ZX can easily swap-ends! It's not a knock at the suspension, it's just what happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
260DET Posted February 27, 2010 Share Posted February 27, 2010 The S130 was an improvement dynamically over the S30 according to Nissan's own testing and their published data, it was designed to be a better car. A friend of mine who is a handy driver drove stock S30's and S130's around a race track back in the day, he presently owns a S30 but says the S130 was a faster car and better to drive near the limit, no doubt. The problem is the S130 suspension does not age well, with clapped out suspension a S30 will perform better in every day use than a similar S130 will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woldson Posted February 27, 2010 Share Posted February 27, 2010 Lets not forget about a manufacture that was cutting corners as well. 86 911s Porsche that my friend has, also has trailing arms, of course, it is only a luxury car,,,,,,,, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolling Parts Posted February 27, 2010 Share Posted February 27, 2010 The S130 was an improvement dynamically over the S30 according to Nissan's own testing and their published data, it was designed to be a better car..but says the S130 was a faster car and better to drive near the limit, no doubt. ABSOLUTELY! The S130 WAS designed to be a better "car" by being wider, actually aerodynamic, better A/C and heating, more hatch space, upgraded brakes, and 1980's crisper styling. It had way better high speed stability because of the aerodynamics and greater width and the front vented brakes and new rear disks felt immune to fade. The change in rear suspension (on the other hand) was a mixed bag. It gave a lot of hatch space and let a 21 gallon gas tank be installed, but all that added new space came at a price. The suspension did not travel well over rough roads(and a lot of road noise and bumps) and if you ever hit a turn too fast you NEVER hit the brakes in the S130 because the change in car pitch would let the rear wheels change camber instantly. Instead on riding nearly flat tread the rears would tilt in and loose some contact with the road. The more you stiffened the suspension to stop it, the less travel and rougher the ride (and the original S130's were set up awfully loose for a softer ride). I OWNED an S30 new in 1976 and an S130 new in 1980. Each car had their better points, but the rear suspension was just not an improvement, even "in the day". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben280zx Posted February 27, 2010 Share Posted February 27, 2010 But ooh well stock for stock .. bring it on .. Hmm **** where did i leave my magic duct tape to fix those wigwag problems !!! Frank, you crack me up. Could I borrow those tape from you to fix some of my problem? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted February 27, 2010 Share Posted February 27, 2010 Frank, you crack me up. Could I borrow those tape from you to fix some of my problem? You can borrow mine, it's certified duct tape! I'd sell you some... Oh, I see donating members are the only ones allowed to post classifieds now... Cool. i'm going to donate so I can sell my certified duct tape to people far and wide. Did I tell you of the time I wore an onion on my belt? 'Twas the fashion at the time, and we called Turkey's "Walking Birds"... Hmm that magical 30 post count doesn't mean much now. Good. I digress... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trippintl0 Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 The only thing I know from working at AutoZone is that the 1983 280zx Turbo has different part number for rear shocks than any of the other year 280zx. I never could compare the two because we didn't stock them at my store, but it may be worth looking into. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolling Parts Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 The only thing I know from working at AutoZone is that the 1983 280zx Turbo has different part number for rear shocks than any of the other year 280zx. The ZX suspension has a nasty habit of a huge rear end "squat" during hard acceleration. Changing to a less cushy rear shock help minimize it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 That's a complete red herring since successful ZX racers were never stock. FYI... the 280ZX won the SCCA SSA (Showroom Stock A) championships in 1982, 1983 and 1984 with a completely stock front and rear suspension (except for shocks). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolling Parts Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 (edited) FYI... the 280ZX won the SCCA SSA (Showroom Stock A) championships in 1982, 1983 and 1984 with a completely stock front and rear suspension (except for shocks). Ah, thanks. I always forget that since the ZX did not take SSA in it's first 3 years of production that it did actually win it in the last few years. You're right. Thanks! Edited March 8, 2010 by Rolling Parts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BleachZee Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 Ah, thanks. I always forget that since the ZX did not take SSA in it's first 3 years of production that it did actually win it in the last few years. You're right. Thanks! It must have been the smooth rubber bumper covers that did it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolling Parts Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 It must have been the smooth rubber bumper covers that did it. Since the car did not change, I wonder if either the Class changed or if the competition changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 Since the car did not change, I wonder if either the Class changed or if the competition changed. Most likely it was development time. 280Zs were carried over until 1982 (typical SCCA Stock category allows for 5 years from model date) while the 280ZXs were being built/sorted. 1980 would have been the first real competition year for the 280ZX for the early adopters. Typical competition for the 280ZX was the 280Z, RX7, Porsche 924, and the Saab 900 Turbo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon 74 260Z Posted March 10, 2010 Share Posted March 10, 2010 (edited) Oops.... Message deleted. Edited March 10, 2010 by Jon 74 260Z Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ckolander Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 Thanks guys, I needed a good laugh. My 79 N/A S130 has plenty of wig-wag. Sure it's caused by shot bushings and probably semi-trailing arms. All that matters is that we love our Datsuns and pass that love on. 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.