rdefabri

Definitely limited eBay experience...he should have set the reserve at 3K and let it run up. It's amazing how many buyers and sellers don't get the dynamic of auctions. It appeared to be a good deal from my perspective.

Arne, You post those here on the Classifieds?

If you want to try something (relatively) "cheap", check out the work Bryan Little did on his Z Car Garage site. He was quoting low 14 second 1/4 mile times, which translates into sub-6 second 0-60 times. Note, he used a 240Z as a starting point (lighter), then swapped in a 280ZX motor and I believe a N42 head, which was "shaved" to boost compression. His cam grind is custom, but I think he gives a stock Crane grind as a reference. FWIW, you could build a "junkyard" racer that would likely satify you and with some effort on your part be done cheaper than most options...FWIW

Slotted mags -

Thanks for the wheel/tire info - I may pawn off my 15in. slotted mags for that setup...

If you wanted a different opinion - put it on eBay and see what you can get. Set a higher reserve so you don't get ripped. Judging by the interest in your car (mine included), $2500 seems too low. If you see the utter garbage out on eBay and what they are getting for these cars, you'd be shocked.

That has to be one of the best looking Z's around - everything just works on that car...the spook, the rims, the color...great stuff!!!

Sean - awesome pics!! Must say I am envious of you! Being here on the East Coast, I don't have much opportunity to see America's Heartland, especially driving it in a Z! Great stuff - truly inspiring, makes me want to jump in and just drive....

That green Z is smoking - like the BRE-style spook and Panasports!

Bob, Not 100% sure it will happen - I may try to sell off some things I have lying around on eBay, maybe my wheels and tires if I can find some junkyard steel wheels. I do sorely want to keep the Z and my wife is being totally cool about it. Unfortunately, I need to fence my property since I have 2 young children. With an acre of property, it won't be cheap. Good luck on the degree, I finished a Master's 2 years ago, the commitment needed to do that was tremendous, can't believe I actually finished!

Lonetreesteve, I feel for you, and may be joining you - I need to generate some cash, and with 2 cars in the garage, my 240Z may be going as well. I am struggling with this, yet don't see any other options. Part of it is that my E-Type needs some TLC and I can't split the focus (and dollars) between the 240Z and the Jag. Since my Jag is untouchable, the only option I see is the Datsun...

Carl, Agree with you on most points, but I always like the FI of the 280Z, FWIW. Maybe it's an assumption that it's "maintenance free" (it's not), but SUs always scared me (go figure, with a 240 and an XKE, I now have 5 to deal with)... I also liked the subtle interior improvements, but hated the "heightened" rear deck in the 1977/1978 models. Given the weight difference, it's no wonder a 240Z takes anything short of a 280ZX Turbo. The 280 engine definitely had the oomph, just lugging more fat killed it. BTW - the 280ZX Turbo is 180HP - I didn't own one, but recall the Car and Driver Road Test (I have it somewhere) that documented it.

I had a 1976 280Z, rated at 149. My buddy had a 1977 280Z, it was rated at 170 - whether there was some change to the ratings (doubtful, sinve typically ratings changes downgrade HP), so something must have changed. Pretty sure my Haynes manual documents this - I'll double check. Honestly, I thought my 1976 280Z was quicker than my current 1972 240Z. It's possible my perspective of "quick" has changed in 20 years, my daily driver is a Lexus GS400, which will paste quite a few cars. I did take my '76 to Englishtown Raceway Park to drag, and I pulled a few 15.7 quarter mile times, about in line with what an earlier 240Z will do.

daddz, Yep, I see the C3's starting to jump - I just don't dig the bubble rear of the 1978 - 1982 models, just looks too ungainly for me. C4, I'd also consider a ZR-1 - you'd be surprised how ridiculously cheap they are. Only bad thing is they look almost identical to a mainstream C4. Honestly, my thoughts are less about speculation/investment outside of the fact that prices are going up, which limits my ability to obtain. I originally wanted a mid-year 1966/1967 Coupe, but even in a shambles, those would run 30K+ (insane, IMHO, but what the market will bear). It was due to that sticker shock that I ended up getting a 1966 E-Type, since the price was right (19K) and they were contemporary to the mid-year Corvettes. I couldn't be happier - the E-Type is unique and (relatively) rare compared to the 'Vette, and decent performance-wise. Almost same with the 240Z - I wanted one, since I had a '76 280Z as a kid, but I saw prices starting to rise so I jumped in. Now same applies for the C3's - I want one, but I don't want to pay an exorbitant sum. I'd likely have to consider getting rid of one of my toys (and it WON'T be the Jag), which is why I am inquiring about thoughts. I took a ride in my 240Z over the weekend, it pretty much cleared up any idea of pawning it off for the 'Vette. While I am still enamored by the C3's, there's a mystique about the Z that just reinforced why I bought one. Like most of us, I'd guess, I am sort of a dreamer. I forsee having a stable of 10+ cars and motorcycles, but I have a family that must take precendent, so I should be happy that I have the toys I do...

Sticker - you are right, my bad. The L82 never dropped below 205 (1975). The L48, however did go pretty low, 165 HP in the same year. At a curb weight of ~3,500 pounds, that's a dog for sure. Even at 205 HP, that's a lot of weight to move. bobc - I'd argue the Z is the better investment. Maybe the price of entry is lower, but the rate of appreciation is greater. I know most here are not Keith Martin/SCM fans, but he rated the 240Z higher than the 1973 - 1977 Corvette in terms of investment grade. FWIW - at the price some C3 'Vettes are going for, I'd consider a C4 and have a pretty decent performance vehicle, albeit one that isn't yet a "classic". Based on the forum input, I can't see why the C3s would be desirable at all, but that may just be a "bias" by people that don't really know...

'79 Vette yes - 77 and earlier Vette, no way a stock Z smokes an L82 - no chance without mods. L48, I'd say possible, but not an L82. Somewhere in my archive, I have a road test of a 1977 L82, manual tranny and it ran something like a 7.3 - 7.4 second 0-60 time. An unmodified 280Z isn't going to run that quick, it's about a half to whole second off. All the C2 and C3s (1963 - 1982) had essentially the same suspension - compared to contemporary iron, the Corvette was likely the weakest handling sports car out there and it's not nimble by any means. Although in stock form, the 240Z has a tendency to oversteer, it's still nimble. By 1977, the L82 was neutered to the point of about 190 hp, so it's anemic for sure, but not a dog. Straight line for the mass-manufactured bunch, it's still pretty quick for the time. Of course, we as Z owners have our biases, but I am trying to look at it more objectively - I get the sense that the Vette is typical American iron - straight line quick, weaker handling. No one here has ever owned one I guess? Any desire or am I just nuts?

Arne, Yes, I tend to like the smaller, lighter cars myself. My old man had a '61 Corvette (so pre-IRS), but it looked good, drove like a tank. Granted, my "E" is 5 years newer, but there's no comparison between the two. That is amongst the many things I enjoy about my 240Z. I know the "mid-years" Corvettes (C2) drove better than my Dad's car, but I don't recall they were so much better - point being that a 1982 "sports" car riding on a near 20-year old suspension doesn't say much for it. The flip side is that the big motor excites me (although it really wasn't that big in the smog years). I should go drive one to see how good/bad the car really is compared to my 240.

Yea, I know they weren't exactly quick - my 240Z is an L24, so not that modified that I think I could smoke one. I got to thinking that my 240 might take more to get it right...it's in fair shape, but needs some work. That's not to say I expect a Vette to be cheaper, but I have always been intrigued by them. I know the SCM is high on them..

Anyone here own (or previously own) a 1973 - 1977 Corvette Stingray? I am curious as to thoughts, especially L82s. Also, thoughts on how it compares (or doesn't) to your S30. I have always liked the "soft" bumper cars, I've had opportunity to drive them when younger, but never owned.

38 and counting...

Moonpup - I AM confused! That's why I posted here - I was always taken aback by the white headliner - it sticks out like a sore thumb against the black panels/vinyl. I agree it's not real easy for someone to swap out the headliner, but it's done, no? As far as quality, the black pieces are of LESSER quality, which led me to assume they were older or "original" opposed to the white headliner which appears clean and without blemish. Further, I am missing the sun visors, implying they were removed to install the new headliner.:eek: I make the assumption the interior was BLACK. But, I could be wrong, and I suppose there's no way to prove it. At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter, as long as black is period correct (it is). But since I now know the car didn't come with a mixed interior, I need to get a black headliner (if that's available, I haven't really checked).

This is nothing new...the same stuff happens in the stock market all the time. It is, however, unethical and I am bummed that it may be true. I read Keith Martin and watch the B-J auctions. I always thought some of the prices at these auctions (and on Sports Car Market) were out of line, but maybe just in denial.

BRE - I've seen this, but in line with Carl's point, I really have no idea what the original paint code was. For all I know, it's been repainted. However, again making an assumption, pulling back the carpet and looking at the paint underneath implies my car is 110 red. I had another Z guy look at it and think the same. Per the info on Carl's site, the interior is "white/black". I don't know if that means "white with black" or "white OR black"...I just want to find out what's period correct....

Carl, Well, I see your point, but I am going under the impression that not too many of these were sold with anything OTHER than black interiors. So based on that, I would conclude that the headliner is not the correct color. It's odd someone would swap it out to make it white, so you could assume that the original interior was white and everything else was swapped to make it black. Judging by the quality of the black pieces, I would tend to think it's the headliner that's not original. This is a question of the authenticity of the materials, it's trying to determine which is the correct period color.

I have a white headliner with black seats, vinyl, rugs, door panels, etc. I always thought this was odd...the car is red, and the interior is original (except seats). Slightly different than yours, but still seems odd to me...