[OptionZero]

I'm a man, i'll fess up:

I probably shouldn't have said what I did because i didn't know what i thought i did.

So you are probably correct.

That said:

Wouldn't it seem easier to make a 155hp, 2800lbs car fast t han to make a 220hp, 3600lbs car fast?


And as others have pointed out, the 3z engine bay is a pretty tight fit. Sure it has 3.0 liters to deal with, but also nearly half a ton more to move.

A 240 has an easy SR solution. 220hp, 2800s with a stock SR. nobody here needs me to tell them that. You tell me, is it easy to bring a n/a 3z to even a stock 3z's level of 300hp?

As for price, doesn't an early '90's turbo 3Z go for around 12G's or less? They have been around 6 years, '90-'96 if memory serves my correctly. A naturally aspirated 3Z would be under 10G's, the same as a very good condition 97-98 s14. So if you want one, you can likely find one. Obviously, insurance plays a big factor.

Rear anti-squat geometry?
Got that from this quote:
"Additionally, the suspension geometry in the rear discouraged any squat at drag starts; in fact, it could produce a bit of annoying wheel hop." - SCC, pg98 jun '03
Certainly, SCC is not the gospel, but in their own project car, they also had problems at the drag strip.
Yes, the S-chassis does share parts wiith the 3Z, but i simply have not read anyone on this forum talk about traction problems. Then also, in SCC's attempt to make Project 240 run 12's at the strip, they did not mention any similar problems with the rear suspension.

Again, i am not saying SCC is right, but i have taken neither a 3Z nor my 240 to a drag strip, so that is what i based my conclusion on.

As for a stock z32 vs. a 240...were you talking about a turbo 3z? Because at 220 hp, a 3z has no where near twice the power as a 155hp. And i dunno, has anyone seen a n/a z32 vs. 240 stock for stock battle on the track?

in another thread at FA, a few people reported some mid-high 15sec times at the strip. Is the n/a 3z any better?

As for why 3z parts are used on a 240, well, it doesn't seem THAT interesting to me. The 3Z began life as a $40,000 sports car, i'm sure nissan did their work designing it. Why are their parts so often found on a 240?

The stock 3z brakes were designed to stop a 3600lbs car. Seems to me that would be a pretty big upgrade on a car weighing around 2800lbs. Same braking force, less mass to stop.
Availablility also plays a big part. Six year production run, there's gonna be some junked 3z's obviously. then, top that off with 3z owners who have upgraded their brakes and no longer need their stock brake hardware, and you have yourself a good source of extra stopping power.

What other stuff? a 3z MAF? isn't that because the 3Z has a 3.0, and therefore would naturally have more air going into it? Apply that MAF to a 2.4L engine, and its an upgrade. Again, i do not have a 3Z MAF on my 240, but that is what i have gathered from my time here. Correct me if i am wrong, please.

What else from a 3Z goes on a 240?

So yeah, i really DO think you know more then 3Z's than me. And yes, i probably WAS talking out of my ass. I'd just like to see why my arguments were so wrong. Besides, most people came to the same conclusion, including dousan himself...they wouldn't trade the 240 for a n/a 3z.

And sorry, OT, but i was at school, so i didn't always get to check Zilvia. And my f#cking Giants had to blow Games 2 and 3, F#ckin jose cruz...