Itr 300zx

You know, after spending a lot of Saturday looking at parts and pieces, it ain't too bad. Junkyard running motors at $1k, built ones from Z1 at about $4k. Brakes, not too bad ($250 for a set of Hawk blues all around). ACT 6 pack clutch, about $500.

Plus, you can get running cars here on C-list for $3-4k all day long.

Just that damn weight. Jake, fix it!
 
I think Jeff is correct in that these aren't horrible expensive cars to purchase and build. Parts seem "reasonable" - not old Z car cheap, but not Porsche expensive either. The weight will cost the owner of the car though - it'll have to eat up tires and brakes faster than a car that weighs 800lbs less - the ones we're driving now.

Cool car, look forward to helping build it.
 
Sure, Jeff, I'll get right on it!

And we know those engines are just limp wristed motivators that have no torque and run out of revs, right?

;)
 
They are an interesting beast that VG30 or whatever they call it. Most show about 180 whp and 175 wtq stock on a Dynojet, with the torque curve VERY flat and the hp rather peaky and not reaching a crescendo until 5500 to 6500 rpm.

Gains from simple stuff does appear to be substantial though. Deleting the clutch fan and replacing with an electric looks like about 8-10. Stillen claims 16 whp for their headers. Stock intake is restrictive, some gains there. I'm sure with a reasonable IT build about 220-230 whp and the same torque is acheivable.

Car seems classed right to me:

222 stock hp X 1.25 gain x. 11.25 hp/weight = 3120 plus 100 or so for aero and suspension.

This should be a bread and butter car for the class.



lateapex911 said:
Sure, Jeff, I'll get right on it!

And we know those engines are just limp wristed motivators that have no torque and run out of revs, right?

;)
Click to expand...
 
JeffYoung said:
That would explain it, and probably accurate too based on what I've read.
Click to expand...

If you think that's accurate, why in tarnation are you asking for a weight break??

I think you should just build one and run it. BTW, we've got one out here that runs in ITE, driven by your Uncle Joe. Ever heard of a radio show called "Rock Line"? That Uncle Joe. How Hollywood is that?

James
 
Uh, cause I was joking on the weight break?? Geez! Not all of us here are only out for the proverbial "me!" lol.......

Yes, I saw that webpage. N/A car too.
 
Whoa whoa whoa. Hold up.

Since when are you one of us Nissan boys? Now you work on one and all, but that doesn't mean you get to join the lofty ranks of Nippon Race Machine drivers.

I think we're going to have to class something British in ITR to keep you in your place and I have the perfect candidate - the Triumph Stag. You won't have to change your trailer paint colors, lettering, or anything.

I'll write the classification proposal tomorrow. There aren't any objections to V8s on the BoD or ITAC is there? I knew they were open minded and all....
 
Ron Earp said:
I think we're going to have to class something British in ITR to keep you in your place ...
Click to expand...

Can't find any recent 2wd Jags with manual tranny's (the S-type would have been a good candidate). Maybe a Lotus... What year is that Elise? Same engine as the Celica already in R right? Probably run about the same weight... 400 lbs over stock.

Edit - maybe more since the Celica has a FWD subtractor
 
Last edited:
Hmm...is tough to think of any Britshit in the 190 to 240 stock hp range.

Elise/Exige, same as the Celica motor, just lighter cars. They would be in R I suppose.

No TVRs sold in the US since the mid 80s.

Aston Martins -- all could be had with 5 speeds and V8s, but too much power.

Rover SD1 Vitesse was a great touring car race car, and 190 stock hp, 220 stock torque, but not many here in the US.

The pickings are slim. Which is a GOOD thing....lol.....
 
JeffYoung said:
Elise/Exige, same as the Celica motor, just lighter cars. They would be in R I suppose.
Click to expand...

I know we're all joking here, but these cars couldn't go into R. They would need too much ballast to meet process weight. I wouldn't be surprised if the GVWR is less than process weight.
 
Yeah, probably what, 400 lbs? My Exige is 2000 lbs curb weight. So maybe 200 lbs once you account for driver and gas. Close to doable but I agree the ballast required is a lot.
 
Jeff, out of curiosity, what's the GVWR on your car? It's probably on the DOT tag which is usually in the door jamb.
 
JeffYoung said:
It's 1980 or something like that.
Click to expand...

No, that would be the curb weight. The GVWR is the max total weight the chassis is built to handle. Its the weight of the car, all fluids, and the total allowed weight of people and cargo.
 
The 300zx would be a very interesting contender in "R". I had a 1994 coupe and it was one of my favorite cars. It was the most reliable vehicle I ever had equivalent to the Miata, actually nothing ever went wrong.

From what I remember it will be a momentum car much like the RX7, torque was modest relative to the weight. Brakes were pretty good but again compared to weight not sure how that will pan out. The RX7 will definitely have the advantage there.

All the motors except the turbo have variable valve timing of some sort that may offer some challenges but it may be easy to disable. Now that we can substitute ECU's the engine management element should be pretty easy. (Wolf, Stillen, APEXi)

This car has crossed my mind on several occasions, the running gear should be totally bullet proof Nissans have always been and the motor is very stout.

Looking forward to more "variation" in our ranks although the TR8 does add may more than it's share of uniqueness to our ranks you've certainly evolved that platform to a pretty high level.

Hope to see ya at Barber might have to spring for some new tires so that I can keep out of the IT7's way I'm tired of fixing body work and paint!

Travers
ITS 19
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top