Interior Ergonomics

[Sean Dezart]

Gee, great thread - over the past few days I sipped several bottles of Pomerol in contemplation end re-education !

I strongly believe that the Z was created to be RHD (although Alan, the fact th

[Sean Dezart]

Sorry about that - the cat walked over my keyboard !

The fact that the designs and prototypes were RHD just reflects the designers country of origin. After that, if the car was primariy for a LHD market, the design team together with the money men would redesign what was necessary to sell that car in that particular market. In this case the US and it was decided that the car would sell without the anti_sway bars, with a 4speed gearbox and without the nice rear diff.

Maybe you guys over there weren't fussy enough or the current choice of car (and you can bet your a*** Nissan compared what was on offer) was still found to be inferior against the limited trim US HLS model !

So it can be said that the US Z was specifically made for the US market - but that is not exactly a reference (lacking so many goodies). Perhaps a coincidental reason why the Nissan competition parts dept. was set up and did so well over there and not in other Z markets. Certainly the dealers made extra money by selling 'options' on many Zs - why not Nissan too ?

Enrique, the UK Z customers had to have a lot of spare cash at the time to buy their Zs - in Aussie land what did the Zs compete with price wise ?

ps there is a French 240Z sitting forlorn in my garage, formerly the property of Fred which has a foot rest !

[daddz]

Sean,

Great point about the money men at Nissan doing what was necessary in order to adapt the car for left hand drive markets. The owner of Banzai Motorworks, Mike McGinnis, has been involved with the Z car since 1970 from the mechanical aspect and has been restoring the cars since 1980, also has the very same impression of Nissan. His overall impression was that Nissan was somewhat arrogant when it came to offering the options that most stateside Z owners would have liked to purchase. The U.S. motoring press, namely Car and Driver, were always clamoring for a back to basics Z that could have been offered for sale here in the U.S. If one looks at the advertising of the day the Z was advertised by U.S. marketing firms who didn't know a sportscar from their a**, touting such things as coat hangers (S30) and the ever impressive resale values (nevermind stagflation's effects) without ever mentioning how good the car was to drive. If Nissan had offered the car and marketed it in much the same way as Mazda had done with the RX7 here in the states the LHD models would be a bit more desirable. For instance, with the second gen. RX7's one could walk in to a dealer and order their RX7 with an aluminum hood if so desired.

As Alan stated the mystery of this car seems to keep me enthralled; if it didn't I would have kept driving the RX7 ('85 GSL-SE and '87 GXL). Lastly, the RHD cars seem more interesting to me having owned a number of left-hookers; My ideal Z car would be a Fairlady ZG finished in GP Maroon with a set of Watanabes and a triple carb. setup much like the one Alan owns.

[Sean Dezart]

Hey daddz,

Don't say that about Alans' car, well everyone to thier taste. Me, I don't like G-noses ! The best G-nose I ever saw was on a 280 ZX !

There, I've said it but again that's what is so great about these cars, yes, the mystery, the different things people have done and tried over the years in varying degrees of taste and also the variety that left the factory !

It would be arrogant in the extreme to say that one model is better than another 'cos it has a higher level of trim or because another sold more.

Before judging a car, judge the judges !

I begin to think that the 240 sold itself and wasn't really helped by Nissan or their seemingly hotspotch chain of dealers/importers !

It was only 'cos the car was so good and in several countries so cheap that there was that flood of demand - I'm not sure it was in response to the admen ! Certain publications getting their hands on one obviously did no end of good but word passed quickly.

[Alfadog]

I wasn't around in 1970 but I would imagine the Z had to compete with much of the same sort of stuff as it had to compete with in England, only the pommy stuff was much more expensive.

We also had Holden Toranas, Monaros (same league?) and maybe a few other Aussie specials.

I guess it did more successfully in Australia than England because (1) it was cheaper to import than to England, (2) English cars were much more expensive because they had to be imported and (3) Australians didn't have much to be pompous about...

Any other *older* Aussie care to shed some light?

btw, my ideal Z is a totally original Z432-R in orange with a black bonnet, some Watanabes and a nice looker in the passenger seat.

[daddz]

I was also to understand that the Ford Capri was a nice alternative to the Z in terms of practicality when it was new and could be had with a V6. I think the Z was more of a "crumpet catcher" though.

[Victor Laury]

I believe Nissan knew what they were doing by exporting the 240's with the missing "Sports car" equipment (rear sway bar, 5 speed, lower rear ratio). Why should they have? What did Americans know about sports cars anyway? Now, I'm not talking about people like us. We are a nitch market at best. In the 60's, 70's and 80's, American (taken as a whole) wanted "Sporty" cars, not Sports cars. comfortable cars with a sporty look. "Look at me!" I'm young and sporty!" What would have been the cost benifit of installing equipment the main body of buyers would not have appriciated in the first place?

Then there's the market in Europe, who I'm sure Nissan felt was smaller and more savy to what a sports car was about. The home market was VERY tiny. Those who could afford to buy an S30 wanted a Japanese supercar. The closer to the real thing, the acuall race cars winning the Japanese GP, the better.

The HLS30 was not an "American car built in Japan", It was a Japanese sports car, dressed down and packaged for the American market.

[Mr Camouflage]

Originally posted by Alfadog

Any other *older* Aussie care to shed some light?

A friend of mine (who's currently working in Japan, has been for a few years now) owns a capri. I looked them up on a capri website recently and something i didn't know was that they were built in australia as well. Only the 3 liter V6 though. Not sure exactly what they meant by built. Probably just assembled. Did the UK get the V6 in the 1st gen capri.

I Guess Ford Australia wanted a bit more horsepower to compete with other early 70's 6 cyl cars such as the 240z, torana and charger.

For the uninitiated:

LJ GTR Torana, Triple Carbies, 3.3 litre (202ci) straight 6. bad points: OHV pushrod valve train, live axle, 4 speed.

A 240z would have a hard time keeping up with a GTR torana in the straights.

[EScanlon]

I owned a 1976 Capri II. It was a hatchback with 2+2 seating that was remarkably comfortable in the rear seats. V6 2800 cc engine, with a 4 speed, I left a few V8's behind in my dust with that car. Wouldn't mind finding one for sale, I would love to have both the Z and the Capri II.

Mr. C; would you post the Capri site you spoke about?

And with that, I ask this: Capri or Capri II. In the U.S. (here we go again.), this car was imported from France and Germany. The Capri was the Coupe, while the Capri II was the hatchback. Anyone out there care to answer, or should I retreat quietly with my tail tucked betwixt my legs?

[Sean Dezart]

-I'm gonna tread carefully here - my 240 was too often mistaken for a CRAPri and this is a Z forum !

The UK series ran 4 pot 1300 cc engines, 1200 and 1500 (I think), 1600 and 2000. I believe at some point there was a V4 2.0 ?

The continental market also ran 2.3 V6 and 2.6 sometimes in RS form) V6. The top of the range in all markets was the V6 3.0 and later the 2.8 V6.

The Capri could be a lot of fun, in later cars you had to drive around with a sandbag in the boot (especially in the wet).

Interms of price the Capri 3.0 just undercut the 240Z in the UK with a 4 speed and unsophisticated suspension, about the same bhp but a lot more torque. The starting image of the first Capris was young, trendy executive who wants a no frills sporty car for the weekend - it ended up as a wannabe car !

A car using the same running gear, the Reliant Scimitar had a classier image but a MUCH higher price tag.

I believe anyone who bought a 240Z much as now wanted to be different (perhaps is already different), especially as at that time Jap imports were blamed for everything from cows milk running dry to the national debt.

Whenever someone criticised me for driving Japanese, quoting what these cars did to our manufacturers, I just reply no-one forced the British to buy them - natural market conditions prevail - you buy the best for less !

A Z has a hard time with a lot of cars in straights lines (and sometimes approaching round-abouts after fast striaghts) but those bends and country lanes in 3rd !!!!!!!

[Zvoiture]

I think Capri's have been kicked around and ignored a bit by the uneducated American car buyer because they were always viewed as some sort of inferior Mercury version of the Mustang. This isn't completely off-topic, because it is another example of the American car buyer assuming the World revolves around them. I don't think it donned on many Americans what the Capri really was until the XR4ti started being marketed.

steve

[EScanlon]

Time Out!

The Mercury Capri had 3 incarnations, series or evolutions in the U.S..

The first series was the Capri, which was imported from France and Germany. It was a Coupe and had a V6 2800 with a 4 speed although an automatic was available later. This was imported from 71-72(?) to 74.

In 1975 none were imported.

1976 saw the introduction of the Capri II, which got the slogan "The Sexy European". This again had the V6-2800cc engine with a 4 speed. This car was a Hatchback, and looked very similar to the earlier Coupe, except, of course, for the back.

The Capri II was built on it's own chassis and had nothing to do with Fordd's Mustang II, other than the II designation. Where the Mustang II had an actual frame, the Capri was Unibody.

Then in 1979, Mercury decided to remake the car on the Mustang Chassis, AFTER the Mustang II was put to rest. This car was plastic and rubber moulding over a common body and frame. Both the Mustang and the Capri were so similar as to confuse people who OWNED them. Not sure how long this car was produced. This is the car that I think, Zvoiture is referring to, as in my opinion and others who owned one, it WAS a crappy car in either of it's incarnations.

In the late 80's (I may be wrong) to early 90's (pretty sure on this) they once again began importing the Capri. This time it was a cute little 2 seater convertible. Not sure where it was imported from. This car sparked some interest, but sadly did not take off as they would have liked.

Enough, TIME IN.