Quote:
Originally Posted by ZMan8
why I am disappointed with the FRS:
Length 166.7 inches
Width 66.9 inches
Height 51.2 inches (excluding antenna base)
Wheelbase 101.2 inches
Track (Front) 59.8 inches
Track (Rear) 6.6 inches
CURB WEIGHT 2737 lb
Maximum output 200hp @ 7,000 rpm
Maximum torque 151 lb.-ft. @ 6,600 rpm
Only 6 more ft lbs of torque
The classic Z was iconic because it was a simple, no nonsense sports car. light, with enough power to keep you happy. In 1969 161 hp was a lot, especially with that weight.
|
You do realize the 240z didn't actually have 161hp right? The way horsepower was measured back in the 70's is not the same way we measure it today. Back then they did gross hp or basically hp measured at the crank with no accessories hooked up and the motor on a stand (not in the car). By todays standards the 240z has closer to 120hp. So comparing it to todays FRS isn't a fair standard. The track times clearly display this considering the 240z was anywhere from a 16.1-17.4 1/4 mile car depending on the magazine you look at. The FRS/BRZ is what, a high 14 sec car? It would eat a 240z for lunch in just about any event.
Thats not to say a 240z can't be competitive for really cheap, because it can but as someone already mentioned the safety on the 240z is horrendous. In the 70's their idea of increasing safety when they switched to the 280z was putting in a single steal beam in the door to help with side crash ratings. I love my 280z and daily drove it for years but I'm glad it's now just a weekend cruiser. Still, with very little money in mods and still non-turbo it will show a FRS a hard time in just about everything but top speed.