Jump to content

Featured Replies


The Z looks to be a late model '76 with the heavy bumpers, + the test car had AC. (ie a little slower then one without the bumpers and or AC)

Only the 924 was a '77 model they said.

attachment.php?s=&postid=75201

post-5751-14150793581391_thumb.jpg

I often wondered if R&T, or any car magazine for that matter, did a performance test of the early 280Z's. Now I know!

Did the article mention if the 280Z was a California smogged car?

Thanks wolf66.

Hmm, was 91 octane all they had back then? They could easily have turned up the comp ratio on those cars... 9:1 would have easily gotten 10-15 more hp, and detonation wouldn't be a problem with 91 octane gas... hell, they could have run 9.5:1 and still had no problems...

But it's not a fair comparision. They put two 4 clyinder, 2liter, 100HP touring cars against a 150 horse Six, with half again more torque? True, the cars weigh about the same and in the same price bracket, but the Z had way more engine than both the Alfa and front engined Porsche. Try it again aginst a 914-6!

Yeah but the Z was the cheapest by thousands of dollars and still spanks em.

What was Porshe thinking putting out a sub 100 Hp car anyway?

Was the 914-6 avail that year and what did it cost?

Create an account or sign in to comment

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Guidelines. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.