...For the BMW 2002/3 series and even M3 handling (rear trailing arms) and so little consideration for Datsun 280ZX one (almost identical set-up)
The ZX did well on the track, my 280Zx 2+2 once well equipped with good wider tires, spacers and good shocks was very fast and better than a my 240Z when stock!

I was afraid just of that! Overreaction

have you ever driven a 2002 or M3? There's no comparison. The rear suspension setup on the ZX was taken from the Maxima platform and was chosen for economy and space savings. It was a big step down in z car performance (as was the entire ZX). I had a Porsche 944 for a while, which also had a rear trailing arm setup. It blew away my 240 on Tokico struts and springs and polyurethane bushings (at least in the handling department) and was a much more comfortable ride as well. I love z-cars but the ZX was not built to be as athletic as the earlier cars and getting one to handle as well as a modified 240 or a 2002 or M3 is just about impossible on any sane budget. Also note that many of the ZX racing cars scrapped that rear setup entirely.

_________________
71 on a rotisserie, two more in pieces in my shed...and a 69 1600 waiting for me to get to it

having driven both an S30 and S130 the handling is much different. i loved my 83 turbo but even my stock suspension on my 78 280Z out handles that car. The 280ZX is more of a Gran Touring car. It was more comfortable compared to my current Z.

_________________
Mike Tubiak
1978 Datsun 280Z - HLS30-438694

Ok so for you a 280Zx couldn't be competitive due to it's handling
The 2002 TII I drove quite a lot wasn't either until the rear arms mount where relocated... 4 hours of work and a world of difference. I bet it's gonna be the same with the ZX

I have argued this for years! My little lightweight 1970 Z is far more nimble than ANY later year or model Z I have driven. Yes, the early Z was crude compared to the luxurious later 260/280 and certainly the ZX carz.

But for what I have come to expect from a real 'sports car', the earliest Zs were the best (for ME). Certainly Paul Newman's (Bob Sharp's) ZX cars would blow my little street Z off any track ~ but that's not a fair comparison. My twin SU 2.4L wasn't meant to compete with a fuelie or tri-power 2.8L. And NONE of the racing Zs used stock suspension, anyway.

I was 'raised' on Healeys. I became accustomed to lots of low-end torque and a lightweight rear end. The 240Z bettered every AH I ever owned, even tho it was built in the same configuration. The Z simply out-handled any AH I ever drove.

I'm tired so I'm not saying this very smoothly, but my point is that the early lightweight Z (altho with only medium power) out-handles every other Z made after that. The later Turbo cars had massive power over the early Z, and race-modified suspension systems, like Boomer says. That made them out-race any early Z.

But straight out-of-the-box, totally unmodified, the early lightweight carz can drive circles around all the later Zs. It just can't keep up in a straight line above 70MPH. But properly driven, it can get to 70 quicker than most later Zs.

When Bob Sharp tweaked his 1970 (1969) 240Z up to about 300hp, it out-ran the "A-Production" Stingrays and Cobras, even tho those cars could nearly catch him at the end of each lap because of their speed down the straightaway. But then they had to back WAAYY off thru the turns, while Bob was able to keep his little Z cranked up to 60% thru the whole course. Ask our member Skip ~ he raced 427 Stingrays for decades, and held the "A/P" lap record for LRP. He can tell you what a PITA a properly set-up 240Z was in the early days.

Frank

_________________
1970 240Z

And what did Skip just bought

HAHA! YEAH! A ZX!

Sort of forgot about that for a moment!!!

_________________
1970 240Z

That's all, thank you your honor!