Spoke earlier to my mechanic, and he agrees with me that I would be better modding the 200SX and leave the 300ZX as stock for now. He is a sensible guy as he strongly recommends I get he suspension and brakes uprated first.

 

He has loads of experience modding 200SX's, and says I could easily take it from ~170BHP to ~250BHP. Happy days !!

 

Maybe I should start visiting a 200SX forum as well !!

www.sxoc.com is your friend

 

on another note, why not sell the 200 and spend the money modding the real beast

 

------------------

I would only get ~ £1500 or less for the 200SX, I like the car, it's handy to have two, a 300ZX uses too much petrol for a daily driver, a 200SX is lighter, it's easier to tune (one turbo and easier physically to work on), a 300ZX looks fast and is, a 200SX can be a woolf in sheeps clothing. Also, I have less to lose if it goes tits-up.

 

Besides, when I have seriously modded it, I'll be giving some of you 300 boys a run for your money !!

Hmmmm,

You say you need 2 cars because the ZX MPG it too bad for a daily driver so keep that stock and tune up the 200SX to a monster the main reason its cheaper to mod really.

However if you tune it to about 300bhp, you will be getting about the same MPG as the ZX.

If the main reason you want 2 cars is to save petrol it sound more sensible to me to keep the 200SX stock to save money and use the ZX for fun and mod.

Other wise you will end up with 2 petrol thirsty cars which which is the contridicting the reason why you have the 200SX too, to same petrol.

 

Stuart

The MPG thing is a just an excuse, if i had a 200 sx aswell (im tempted) id use it more than the zed purely because theres so much less to loose if you kill and and less to go wrong when the inevitable happens!

 

I love the s 13 and a lot of people underestimate the cars, 2 friends of mine have them and one of them keeps u with me and mine is no way near stock!

 

Great cars, great times!

 

 

LUKE DUKESTER

 

------------------

Hello Mate,

 

My Advice is to get on the SXOC forum, there are loads of cheap mods to get it to 250BHP.

 

But if you wanna a class car to get to mod do the Z.

 

The SX just can't handle the power like the Z!

 

Mark

Whats the point of having 2 cars with nearly the same HP.

 

It wont make any difference in MPG neither in performance.

 

Keep ur 200sx stock so u can save some money on fuel and mod ur Z up to 400HP and drive it evenings or weekends for fun.

Petrol is not the primary reason for deciding to mod the 200SX, the following are...

 

1. 200SX's are lighter, so performance mods will have more effect on performance.

 

2. Only one turbo, so cheaper.

 

3. Less complicated engine, so easier.

 

4. More room in engine bay, so easier.

 

5. Less to go wrong.

 

6. Fun to have a car which is a lot faster than it looks.

 

7. My mechanic (good relationship) has more experience with them.

 

8. Car is better designed for fast acceleration at lower speeds imo - smaller, more efficient[due to being smaller] engine [300ZX is heavier and better suited to high (illegal) top speeds more].

 

9. Highly modding a 300ZX takes you into performance which you cannot practically use. Above a certain power (500bhp?), you just get wheelspin at high revs.

 

10. My 200SX has done >120,000 miles, my 300 ~85,000.

 

A 300ZX is less of a tunable boy-racers car than a 200SX imho. You wouldn't tune a Ferrari now would you ?? I'm not saying modding a 300 is silly, just that you won't be able to use it past a certain bhp.

 

IMHO - a 300ZX is a posing mobile (like a Ferrari) rather than a 0-60 machine.

 

Hope this doesn't start a war, I love my 300ZX, just being honest with you.

Where do you come up with this stuff? you could mod your 200sx and would end up spending 3times the money to get to 300bhp then youd take to get a zed to 400bhp and the zed would still walk it.

8. Car is better designed for fast acceleration at lower speeds imo - smaller, more efficient[due to being smaller] engine [300ZX is heavier and better suited to high (illegal) top speeds more]

So your saying a 200sx has a more efficient engine? On what do you base that (lets get factual here)

if a 200sx is designed for fast acceleration

and its not as fast accelerating as 300zx so what does that make the 300zx designed for?

9. Highly modding a 300ZX takes you into performance which you cannot practically use. Above a certain power (500bhp?), you just get wheelspin at high revs.

 

How do you know considering your car is bog standard?

A 300ZX is less of a tunable boy-racers car than a 200SX imho.

???? there are far more tuning shops for the 300zx and tuning parts for the 300zx than there are for the 200sx period.

You wouldn't tune a Ferrari now would you ??

 

? I beg to differ http://www.0-100.it/koenig/550maranello/english.htm http://www.hamann-motorsport.de/homee.htm

to name a few

I'm not saying modding a 300 is silly, just that you won't be able to use it past a certain bhp.

Again how would you know? and what is the certain bhp? as opposed to a 200sx? which has far less scope for horespower/modifications?

 

 

disclaimer (i in no way am having a pop at any of the 200 guys)

 

Originally posted by 300z:

disclaimer (i in no way am having a pop at any of the 200 guys)

 

Good you ****.

 

 

 

Warren - will reply to this when I have time...

LOL

You'll need a long, long time!

 

I have to say your posts are the funniest I've ever read on this forum

Are you serious about this stuff?

You obviously think about these things for ages and then come up with a very obscure answer that is way off what any normal Z'er would come out with!

 

If you spent as much time under the bonnet as you do pondering the ins and outs of everything you would have the most sorted Z around!

 

My Z is running about 430bhp ish and could still do with more power - I use it to the full no problem. If they were of no use with over 300bhp why is everyone modding them as high as they can afford? 650-750bhp Nice!

 

You may as well say an F1 car should only have 100bhp as its got slick tyres and would be a handfull with any more...

 

 

[This message has been edited by ChrisC (edited 27-09-2002).]

The 200SX/300ZX think, I think you should mod your ZX.

Induction, Exhaust, Decat and chip and you be getting about 35% power increase for £1,000.

With a 200SX the same things on the SX and you will probably get getting the same power increase. Stock SX power is 180bhp, so I am lead to believe. 35% of 300 is 405. 35% of 180 is 240.

After that you are looking at engine strengthening on both cars which costs ££££££.

But its up to you, its your money and time.

 

Stuart

For a given type of car, there is an optimal engine size range. When I said the 200SX has a more efficient engine, what I meant is that ANY [except older engines] good engine is more efficent when compared to a larger engine - this is due to physics. A larger engine has more potential power, but weighs proportionally more. Cooling is harder in a larger engine, as there is less surface area to volume, so cooling systems have to be better. BUT, the overall mass of the car and the desirable performance characteristics determine what the optimal engine size is.

 

A roadster is best with a 1.8/2-litre engine because it is relatively lightweight. The record car for 0-60 is a Caterham 7 I think

 

A top speed road car is best with a 3 or 4-litre engine because the car is heavy. Enter the 300ZX.

 

A fast car which is not designed for an extreme top speed OR to be ultra lightweight at expense of comfort/features/practicaliy is probably best with an engine of around 2-litres. This is where a 200SX comes in.

 

So heavily modding a 300ZX will only make top speed greater PAST A POINT. You will improve 0-60 acceleration, but this tails off past a certain BHP, such that extr powr delivery cannot be transferred to the road, otherwise a very high BHP 300ZX would hold the record for 0-60 in a road car. - note an Escort Cossie will always beat a 300ZXTT 0-60 when it's heavily modded. This is because the 300ZX is heavy and has a heavy engine.

 

Put it this way -why are Imprezas and other rally cars all of around 2-litres displacement ? Answer -because a 3-litre engine or greater provides more undesirable mass than it does extra power. For high top speeds, this is needed, but at normal road speeds, it is not needed.

 

In summary a 200Sx has more useable power.

Originally posted by ChrisC:

LOL

You'll need a long, long time!

 

I have to say your posts are the funniest I've ever read on this forum

Are you serious about this stuff?

You obviously think about these things for ages and then come up with a very obscure answer that is way off what any normal Z'er would come out with!

 

 

[This message has been edited by ChrisC (edited 27-09-2002).]

 

if you want to slag me off, can you quote FACTS and ARGUMENTS please, rather than vague assertions. I do not claim to be an expert on engines, but I am intelligent and know the basics. I also like to weigh up all the alternatives, and hear poeople's opinions. It's called progress. I am probably not your average Z head, but that might not be a bad thing !! Do you not like my arguments because they question things which you do not want to know/think about ?!!

 

I actually think a Z could do with more power than stock. But the Z engine can go to 1000 BHP, and that is only useful for top speed records/burnouts/wheelspin.

For a given type of car, there is an optimal engine size range. When I said the 200SX has a more efficient engine, what I meant is that ANY [except older engines] good engine is more efficent when compared to a larger engine - this is due to physics. A larger engine has more potential power, but weighs proportionally more. Cooling is harder in a larger engine, as there is less surface area to volume, so cooling systems have to be better. BUT, the overall mass of the car and the desirable performance characteristics determine what the optimal engine size is.

In a 4 cylinder lay out 2 litres is probably optimal, does not mean its more efficient better than a 3 litre motor? i mean efficiency is based on horespower per litre? So do the math.

 

and since big engines are not the best way of going about getting bhp, wonder why mclaren f1 uses 6.1 litres, wonder why ferrari 550 uses 5.5 litres, lambo uses 6 litres? could it be they are all wrong lol

A roadster is best with a 1.8/2-litre engine because it is relatively lightweight. The record car for 0-60 is a Caterham 7 I think[/img]

production record is a 6.1 litre engine to 60 - 3.2 seconds (and im talking about stock production car, not modified to the hilt)

A top speed road car is best with a 3 or 4-litre engine because the car is heavy. Enter the 300ZX.

this is a fact lmao? top speed of mclaren f1 is 245mph and it weighs just over a thousand kilos and has a 6 litre engine? (guess they dident think when they designed that)

A fast car which is not designed for an extreme top speed OR to be ultra lightweight at expense of comfort/features/practicaliy is probably best with an engine of around 2-litres. This is where a 200SX comes in.

im pretty sure you pull this out your ear hole, im also pretty sure you dont actually have a 300zx as you clearly havent driven one.

cars are designed according to a specific market,budget,price range ect. So comparing a car like a 300zx to a 200 sx which are not even in the same catagorie is prettylame really just like your posts.

So heavily modding a 300ZX will only make top speed greater PAST A POINT. You will improve 0-60 acceleration, but this tails off past a certain BHP, such that extr powr delivery cannot be transferred to the road, otherwise a very high BHP 300ZX would hold the record for 0-60 in a road car. - note an Escort Cossie will always beat a 300ZXTT 0-60 when it's heavily modded. This is because the 300ZX is heavy and has a heavy engine.

so lets see very hi horespower 300zx's can make it into the hi 9's low 10;second braket over a 1/4mile? so that makes for a 0-60 -time of low 3's (2.7 sec was the best -60 that a 300 went in street form in the states)

so if thats your idea of slow then hmmm.

and a cossie runs 4 wheel drive, and compared to the really hi horespower skylines i dont think it comes near them on 60 times, Skylines on street tyres are in the low 8 secs for 1/4mile, FACT you never will get an escort cossie to do those times on street tyres period, why because 2 litres does not cut the mustard.

engien size on a skline? oh its more than 2 litres.

 

Put it this way -why are Imprezas and other rally cars all of around 2-litres displacement ? ]

Answer -you dumb idiot, becuse the rally rule book dictates this engine formula.

and since the road cars are needed to produce the rally car they hence have a specific engine? do your homework.

In summary a 200Sx has more useable power.

 

Bullshit an larger engine provides far more torque you nana, engine torque makes for more usable power, as torque is a true performance indicator, and hmmmm heres a suprise a 2 litre engine cant make the torque a 3 litre engine can in stock form, so i wonder hmmmm.

you seem to base everything you say on assumption.

how can you get pissed of at chrisc when you post probably the dumbest question/answers on any forum around?

if you dont like the replys dont ask the question you ask?

 

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by 300z (edited 29-09-2002).]

Sorry guys but I have to back Dave(Nelson) up on this. Yeah 300's are easy to mod and get the power(Pete Thongs got the power) but he's right in his assumption of maxing his 200 IMHO.

 

How many of us have maxed our 300-Shed-X's and what happens next? BANG!

 

Not disagreeing with any of you to be honest but I find that chucking K's at me 300 is great but how long before the next problem? Not very long!

 

Warren you can back me up on this mate.

 

Yeah 450 bhp Z kicks 200SUX's **** but I would say that I reckon a 200 is more bullet proof.

 

I don't know anyone with a 300 who has added even subtle mods e.g. intake and zorst and not had any problems afterwards.

 

Not taking sides or sticking up for certain people but at the end of the day these cars are FAR from being bullet proof and you can buy any car and have problems. But these cars are never ending and need massive injections of wonga when it all goes belly up.

 

So saying that, which would you rather mod if you are on a set budget and own both a 300 and a 200? I would say that the sensible thing would be to mod the 200 and that way your 300 will stay on the road for longer = giving the owner more driving enjoyment and pleasure!

 

Just my 10p

 

P.S. I've met Dave and don't judge a book by its cover...he's a very intelligent and top bloke!

 

 

 

------------------

"Life sucks. Get a F**king helmet, okay?"

Denis Leary

I have never pissed my self laughing so much on this place.

 

I know more about cars than this person, and this is second hand from watching Rob.

 

Warren rock on.

 

Hugs and kisses

 

Mrs dunk300zxtt (Wendy)

Originally posted by 300z:

Bullshit an larger engine provides far more torque you nana, engine torque makes for more usable power, as torque is a true performance indicator, and hmmmm heres a suprise a 2 litre engine cant make the torque a 3 litre engine can in stock form, so i wonder hmmmm.

you seem to base everything you say on assumption.

how can you get pissed of at chrisc when you post probably the dumbest question/answers on any forum around?

if you dont like the replys dont ask the question you ask?

 

 

I was waiting for your response you nasty fookwit. I'm dying to meet you at a 300 meet, you cowardly fook ! It's easy to be hard behind a computer isn't it you prick ?!

 

Your responses clearly show you have musunderstood my explanations.

 

You never once mentionesd MASS in your 'critique' and that is the crux of my argument !!

 

Efficiency - a 1cc engine would be more efficient FOR IT'S MASS than a 10cc engine. A 1 litre engine would be more efficient that a 2 litre engine FOR IT'S MASS etc. etc.

Got it dumbo ?

 

F1's and Lambos' being very high displacement - this is because they aint turbocharged you idiot AND they are lighter than a 300 engine [and most 'normal' engines]!

 

FACT - a Caterham 7 once held the record for the fastest accelerating car. The production record you quote of a large engine size is not relevant because kit cars are not included in that you nob.

 

I'm pretty sure the engine size of rally cars is optimised for the task of rally driving. The rule book is only to stop them from gaining an advantage by SLIGHTLY increasing engine size [note this would not involve extra MASS, so advantageous]. It's just to make a level playing field - something you know nothing about clearly !

 

It's pretty stupid slagging people off when you talk shyte yourself !! Why people like you on this forum I do not know. You are a nasty piece of ****.

Originally posted by dunk300zxtt:

I have never pissed my self laughing so much on this place.

 

I know more about cars than this person, and this is second hand from watching Rob.

 

Warren rock on.

 

Hugs and kisses

 

Mrs dunk300zxtt (Wendy)

 

Where's the FACTS, where are the ARGUMENTS ?!

 

ALL I see is aload of crap comin' out of a coward. You suckin Warren's **** ?!

Originally posted by Nelson MainFella:

I was waiting for your response you nasty fookwit. I'm dying to meet you at a 300 meet, you cowardly fook ! It's easy to be hard behind a computer isn't it you prick ?!

 

Your responses clearly show you have musunderstood my explanations.

 

You never once mentionesd MASS in your 'critique' and that is the crux of my argument !!

 

Efficiency - a 1cc engine would be more efficient FOR IT'S MASS than a 10cc engine. A 1 litre engine would be more efficient that a 2 litre engine FOR IT'S MASS etc. etc.

Got it dumbo ?

 

F1's and Lambos' being very high displacement - this is because they aint turbocharged you idiot AND they are lighter than a 300 engine [and most 'normal' engines]!

 

FACT - a Caterham 7 once held the record for the fastest accelerating car. The production record you quote of a large engine size is not relevant because kit cars are not included in that you nob.

 

I'm pretty sure the engine size of rally cars is optimised for the task of rally driving. The rule book is only to stop them from gaining an advantage by SLIGHTLY increasing engine size [note this would not involve extra MASS, so advantageous]. It's just to make a level playing field - something you know nothing about clearly !

 

It's pretty stupid slagging people off when you talk shyte yourself !! Why people like you on this forum I do not know. You are a nasty piece of ****.

 

LMAO he he he this is to funny. reread what you said you nob, and dont threaten people when you havent met them ect, cause whos being the keyboard ninja? im not the one making idle threats lol (now thats the keyboard ninja stuff)

 

do you work for the Darwin awards?

i replied facutally to everything you answered.

if you dont like that dont post such stupid questions, or at least do your homework. I mean you know how to post on here so you must know how to acess the world wide web? there is a wealth of information available for anyone willing to read about it.

Lmao

 

 

What a surprise another c*nt who cannot take critisism from someone or something other than his own asshole.

 

If I was sucking Warrens C*ck what business is it of your's. His might be a lot bigger than your's because his brain very clearly is.

 

So crawl back into the hole you once came from Captain Caveman, pull you foreskin over your head and F*ck your self into oblivion.

 

Goodnight and good bye.

 

Hugs and kisses

 

Mrs dunk300zxtt(Wendy)

 

P.S. when at the next meet please introduce your self so i can give you your's personally. up your's too.

Originally posted by dunk300zxtt:

I have never pissed my self laughing so much on this place.

 

I know more about cars than this person, and this is second hand from watching Rob.

 

Warren rock on.

 

Hugs and kisses

 

Mrs dunk300zxtt (Wendy)

 

What? Who? Me?

 

LMFAO

 

 

 

------------------

"Life sucks. Get a F**king helmet, okay?"

Denis Leary

Timmy can I suck you C*ck too, being as I am being accussed the more the merrier.

 

Just not Captain Caveman.

 

Mrs dunk300zxtt(Wendy)

ROFLMFAO

 

Wendy(Ms Whiplash) you have a wicked tongue and live upto your name! LMFFFFAAAAAOOOOOOO

 

Wicked woman!

 

 

 

------------------

"Life sucks. Get a F**king helmet, okay?"

Denis Leary

Originally posted by 300z:

LMAO he he he this is to funny. reread what you said you nob, and dont threaten people when you havent met them ect, cause whos being the keyboard ninja? im not the one making idle threats lol (now thats the keyboard ninja stuff)

 

do you work for the Darwin awards?

i replied facutally to everything you answered.

if you dont like that dont post such stupid questions, or at least do your homework. I mean you know how to post on here so you must know how to acess the world wide web? there is a wealth of information available for anyone willing to read about it.

Lmao

 

 

You've stopped arguing because you can't.

 

I wasn't threatening you from my keyboard, merely saying it would be interesting to meet you !! there's a big difference - you should know that !!

 

Darwin Award ? - that's all you know isn't it ?!!