No doubt the topic of much discussion, spring is coming and im thinking about another Z. I know the hassles involved in having a TT so am considering a NA. I cant find a thread comparing the pros and cons though -(my fault not good at using the search probabaly)

Can anyone convince me to go for a NA? Whats the pickup like? I have never driven an NA and am wary it may feel slow. Not interested in big power just close to stock TT would be good so what could I do to up the NA's power?

Saxo vts... deceptively quick little sod, up to about 110mph then its all out of ideas...

 

End of the day its power to weight, and the NA, especially a nice specced 2+2 is a heavy car, standard trim at 220 to 230bhp depending on market just doesnt cut the mustard anymore... BMW 330ci, even the E46 was 231bhp and newer ones are more like 260bhp or so. But these are still heavy cars... Its when you get a 1200kg car with 220+bhp the NA would begin to struggle....

 

But i have learnt the 300zx isnt all about speed, yes they are quick cars but they are acheingly beautiful cars.

 

Was only yesterday me and some mates went for a drive, 2 scoobs 2 evos and my 300zx, now my great big whale with its oh so very old suspension cannot stay anywhere near those 4 door saloons with 250 to 350bhp, (also my driving letting us down as well but lets not go there!) were far quicker and more surefooted down the little B roads and some of the twisty A roads, but when we pulled up a pub for some lunch the 300zx shone.

 

Such a pretty dainty thing, with clean flowing lines, almost timeless against the tall and brash playstation four wheel drive stuff. My roof line doesnt even each the top of the spoilers on the most sedate scoob.

 

I realised then what the 300zx is, a sports car, not a hot hatch, or a rally car. But a proper, beautiful (and compromised for it...) but its purpose is to look good, which the evo and the scoob just cant do. They look agressive, but not good.

Yep TT or NA both great cars in different ways. I think if I was going to use the car daily I would go for a NA overall but I am looking for a weekend car so I have to decide between the two still. I will testdrive a NA when I get the chance. I need something a bit more engaging than my mk1 gs Sport which in my opinion has great looks but not the grunt. Its more of a cruiser, comfortable drive. Befor that I had a re-mapped MK4 Golf 130TDI. I would be happy with a Z that could own that in every way, not that I race about.

I'm concerned by some of the coments about NA's and have just add a few important points about running costs of the 2 and performance.

 

The NA I use as a daily drive is quick and monsters all these new hot hatches, but it is chipped and has an Induction.

 

My other NA I thought was slow, but Paul at SWZ said its normal performance for a standard NA. Also Apatchie's NA with similar mods to mine and dyno'd at 243 RWBHP which is about 20 RWBHP up on the standard TT and proberbly about 295 FWBHP at a tunning cost of about £200. Thats a staggering 30% power increase. + repair and maintenace costs are cheeper. You don't need a new engine loom every time you do serious engine work.

 

Most importantly to get a 30% power increase in a TT you looking at nearer to £1000

Dave chung has done alot off wibbling with his NA and is doing 14.1 second standing 1/4 miles with standard Cams, heads and factory cast porting. Mainly acheived through weight saving.

 

The Yanks and the Ausi's recon with cam's (£400) 370 injectors (everyone upgrading their TT gets rid of these so (£40) Good chip (JD £50) induction (£50) headers (£130)and Decats (£130) will see 260+ RWBHP.

 

Thats 310 to 330 FWBHP for about £1000. That a seriously quick car for a little money

 

You buy a TT with so called 60k to 70k on the clock for £2500 to £3500. your looking at new turbos quite likely over the next 12 months (£1000) new wiring loom and original will be fried do to the heat. (£350) then even to get to the above 330 FWBHP you'll need a boost controller (£450) induction (£50) and a chip (£50) so thats another £2000. Then you've got to still sort out soggy Hicas steering and shit. Then you'll think I'll squeeze more power out of it and spend several more grand until you either blow your engine or turbos and on it goes.

 

I think NA is a better way to go even though I've done the £30K+ big build Turbo power. I wouldn't advise anyone else to do it.

I'm concerned by some of the coments about NA's and have just add a few important points about running costs of the 2 and performance.

 

The NA I use as a daily drive is quick and monsters all these new hot hatches, but it is chipped and has an Induction.

 

My other NA I thought was slow, but Paul at SWZ said its normal performance for a standard NA. Also Apatchie's NA with similar mods to mine and dyno'd at 243 RWBHP which is about 20 RWBHP up on the standard TT and proberbly about 295 FWBHP at a tunning cost of about £200. Thats a staggering 30% power increase. + repair and maintenace costs are cheeper. You don't need a new engine loom every time you do serious engine work.

 

Most importantly to get a 30% power increase in a TT you looking at nearer to £1000

Dave chung has done alot off wibbling with his NA and is doing 14.1 second standing 1/4 miles with standard Cams, heads and factory cast porting. Mainly acheived through weight saving.

 

The Yanks and the Ausi's recon with cam's (£400) 370 injectors (everyone upgrading their TT gets rid of these so (£40) Good chip (JD £50) induction (£50) headers (£130)and Decats (£130) will see 260+ RWBHP.

 

Thats 310 to 330 FWBHP for about £1000. That a seriously quick car for a little money

 

You buy a TT with so called 60k to 70k on the clock for £2500 to £3500. your looking at new turbos quite likely over the next 12 months (£1000) new wiring loom and original will be fried do to the heat. (£350) then even to get to the above 330 FWBHP you'll need a boost controller (£450) induction (£50) and a chip (£50) so thats another £2000. Then you've got to still sort out soggy Hicas steering and shit. Then you'll think I'll squeeze more power out of it and spend several more grand until you either blow your engine or turbos and on it goes.

 

I think NA is a better way to go even though I've done the £30K+ big build Turbo power. I wouldn't advise anyone else to do it.

 

I think you've got a bit carried away with the NA tunability there Mark...its nowhere near as tunable as that...

 

Apache's 243 bhp figure was at the fly !! (189 rwhp) with 210Ib/ft torque. Thats about a 15hp increase over stock NA power and 40hp down on a Stock TT with 70 Ib/ft less torque. Its the torque difference that is most noticeable when driving them.

 

As a tunablity comparison a TT with Chip and 1 bar boost (£100) would make around 350 fwhp and 340 Ib/ft torque on (average).....thats over 100hp and 130 Ib/ft torque more than the above NA.

 

Having looked through all the Dyno threads here and in the U.S, I've Seen 1 or 2 with around 220 rwhp with the full mods you listed above but seems to be about the max out there.

 

Unless you can do all the labour yourself then cost to get there would be more like £2k if you had it all done at same time, more if done seperatly.

Very few get above 200rwhp (with chip, headers, induction, exhaust).

 

...and thats on U.S Dyno's !

I think you've got a bit carried away with the NA tunability there Mark...its nowhere near as tunable as that...

 

Apache's 243 bhp figure was at the fly !! (189 rwhp) with 210Ib/ft torque. Thats about a 15hp increase over stock NA power and 40hp down on a Stock TT with 70 Ib/ft less torque. Its the torque difference that is most noticeable when driving them.

 

As a tunablity comparison a TT with Chip and 1 bar boost (£100) would make around 350 fwhp and 340 Ib/ft torque on (average).....thats over 100hp and 130 Ib/ft torque more than the above NA.

 

Having looked through all the Dyno threads here and in the U.S, I've Seen 1 or 2 with around 220 rwhp with the full mods you listed above but seems to be about the max out there.

 

Unless you can do all the labour yourself then cost to get there would be more like £2k if you had it all done at same time, more if done seperatly.

Very few get above 200rwhp (with chip, headers, induction, exhaust).

 

...and thats on U.S Dyno's !

 

Flipping eck 243 at the fly. I thought it was at the wheels because it was the most powerful car dynoed that day and more powerful than a brace of R33's and Chris C's TT. :rofl: :rofl:

 

I also have read in the past that with the cams and and lightweight fly, pully's etc that 260 RWHP is acheivable on stock ports and internals. (I only need the cams) Even John Dixon thinks it is feazable, but I did say it was American.

 

You also talking I bar boost using mic tips or a cheep bleed valve which I wouldn't advercate to anyone having seen the damage that can result and yes I was talking about doing all the labour yourself. If you going to cost labour in then the TT costs even more as there is much more work involved with the TT because of all the extra bits and greater complexity.

 

I'd be happy with 230 RWHP which is Stock TT kind of umph with better torque and no lag Also the lower gearing make a big difference. I stil think for a everyday drive the NA is a better bet.

Flipping eck 243 at the fly. I thought it was at the wheels because it was the most powerful car dynoed that day and more powerful than a brace of R33's and Chris C's TT. :rofl: :rofl:

 

I also have read in the past that with the cams and and lightweight fly, pully's etc that 260 RWHP is acheivable on stock ports and internals. (I only need the cams) Even John Dixon thinks it is feazable, but I did say it was American.

 

You also talking I bar boost using mic tips or a cheep bleed valve which I wouldn't advercate to anyone having seen the damage that can result and yes I was talking about doing all the labour yourself. If you going to cost labour in then the TT costs even more as there is much more work involved with the TT because of all the extra bits and greater complexity.

 

I'd be happy with 230 RWHP which is Stock TT kind of umph with better torque and no lag Also the lower gearing make a big difference. I stil think for a everyday drive the NA is a better bet.

 

There seems some discussion about the numbers at the end of the day but for a more practical daily driver - fun every day! the NA seems to edge it. You pay your money and take your choice at the end of the day they both seem great cars.

I actually thought he na had 230bhp at the wheels! 189 isnt great, thought they were a 200bhp+ car! shocked!

I actually thought he na had 230bhp at the wheels! 189 isnt great, thought they were a 200bhp+ car! shocked!

230 fly. It is a 200+ bhp car.

 

All manufacture and published BHP quotes are flywheel HP. Its about 170'ish at the wheels I think. Wheel output is only really used in the tuning world.

 

The TT is 280/300 at the fly. 230-240 at the wheels.

the answer is get both lol

 

i love the care freeness when driving the supra but it doesnt make me smile like the z does :(