Just so our 2+2 friends have some ammunition to use in self defence; the fact that the 2+2 was designed ALONGSIDE the 2- seater ( and not later on ) seems to be a little-known fact amongst 2+2 owners - and it is always useful to use this as a retort to those ".......the original is better......." jibes.

The design team ( headed by Yoshihiko Matsuo ) came up with many possible variants over the "final" shape, but it was decided to stick to the 2-seater body for the first incarnation of the S30. So, an almost perfect incarnation of the 2+2 was conceived alongside the 2-seater - just the 2-seater debuted first.

There were a few other "weird" variants mooted in the early days too ( anyone fancy an S30 Sport Wagon?! ).

Alan T.

The 2+2 does look decent, but the kink in the roofline makes it soooo different. It's like a totally different car, in my mind. It looks more of a luxury cruiser and not sporty at all... it's strange how such a small change can change one's perspective on the car completely.

*cough*280zx*cough*

I used to have a 260 2+2 (actually Dad did). Though I prefer the 2 seater, had it not been for the 2+2, I probably would have never been exposed to the Z (since we were a family of 4).

When I was in high school, I used to CRAM 5 or 6 people in that thing to cruise around partying... talk about Cop-bait.

Enough of the ZX bashing(!), I've seen some SWEET ZX's. Cars change, and the Z had to as well. Remember the Camaro's and Firebirds? The entire decade of the 70's and into the early 80's they only changed the bumpers and lights; by 1985 EVERY OTHER car on the rode was one of those things... it was nauseating. I felt bad for the people that had nice ones; you didn't even notice.

u guys all z's are cool (save the non turbo zx's) but from a performance stand point its all about the 2 seater

I agree with Alfadog the extended roofline makes it look more luxury than sporty..That just kills the look for me..No stretch z for the rasta..

Just so our 2+2 friends have some ammunition to use in self defence; the fact that the 2+2 was designed ALONGSIDE the 2- seater ( and not later on ) seems to be a little-known fact amongst 2+2 owners - and it is always useful to use this as a retort to those ".......the original is better......." jibes.

The design team ( headed by Yoshihiko Matsuo ) came up with many possible variants over the "final" shape, but it was decided to stick to the 2-seater body for the first incarnation of the S30. So, an almost perfect incarnation of the 2+2 was conceived alongside the 2-seater - just the 2-seater debuted first.

There were a few other "weird" variants mooted in the early days too ( anyone fancy an S30 Sport Wagon?! ).

Alan T.

Really. I've never heard that before. I know that the 240z was developed originally as a convertible to replace the roaster/2000 sports or whatever it was called in the country you live in, and the develpment of the convertible continued alongside the development of the coupe for some time (in the design studio at least).

They even toyed with the idea of a mid engine coupe.

Some of those early designs were very ugly (i've got photos to prove it). You should be glad the 240z looks the way it does, and the 2+2 looks great compared with some of the prototypes.

I think the best angle to look at a 2+2 it from directly in front, ............so you dont notice that it's a 2+2!

Mr C

Hi Mr C,

Just in case you doubt me, have a look at this photo from 1968. That's the full-size mock-up of the 2+2 shape of the S30 before it was decided to concentrate on the 2-seater body for the initial sales drive.

Alan T

........and here's that S30 Sport Wagon design sketch.

Maybe Mr Matsuo was inspired by one of the Drogo bodies for Ferrari in the early '60's ( which was quickly nicknamed the "Bread Van".................... ).

Alan T.

Sweet! I actually like that... just because it's really different.

Any other weird prototypes that never made it?

EEEK!

How would you feel if your 240z looked like this:

or this: