Is The Nissan 280ZX REALLY The Worst Z Car?

The Nissan 280ZX was the follow-up to the highly successful 240Z. It deviated from its predecessor in a few major ways. a major emphasis was placed on technology and comfort. While this made the 280ZX more attractive to a wider audience, it also affected the driving dynamics and handling. In this video, we'll discuss the conception, design development, and market reception of the Nissan 280ZX, the Z of the 1980s.

The early ideation phase began in two phases. In the first phase, designers were encouraged to explore ideas without adhering to the Z legacy. Even though the drawings were relatively loose, there were a few elements that were all but guaranteed to make the cut. A long hood and short overhangs were expected of a front-engine, rear-wheel-drive coupe. Many of the drawings also featured a kick in the window that emphasized the rear wheel. Designers clashed over the finer details, though. The B-pillar, for instance, saw a wide variety of executions.

Another came up in the second sketching phase, which was more grounded in comparison to the first. One of the most contentious issues was the execution of the front grille. The old S30 had a wide opening that was bisected by the bumper. While it’s undoubtedly iconic, it also wasn’t the most elegant solution, and this definitely showed in the late model 260Z and 280Z. Designers tried to modernize this element with a more integrated solution. It wasn’t until they stepped into the wind tunnel that they settled on a direction. Sealing off the opening above the bumper and sending the air into the lower intake proved to be the better solution. A front-end spoiler channeled more cooling into this area and had the added benefit of reducing front-end lift.

Styling wasn’t the only fact that they needed to consider. Nissan had to ensure that it could excel as a daily driver. Safety, usability, and NVH were all prime considerations. In terms of crash protection, the IP was designed to collapse and absorb the impact if the driver were thrown against it in the event of an accident. Interior controls were also adjusted to make them as safe and usable as possible. Hard or protruding items that could prove hazardous during an impact were replaced with large and soft touch points. The 2-passenger and 2+2 body styles used different seats. The high-backed bucket seats from the 280Z were updated and carried over into the former, as they suited its more sporting character. 2+2 models were equipped with more comfortable low-backed models that increased visibility for occupants in the rear.

Overall interior volume increased dramatically. The S30 had 57 cubic feet of space. The S130, meanwhile, had about 73 cubic feet of space. Luggage capacity increased 37 percent from 7.47 cubic feet to 12.61 cubic feet. This was thanks in part to the use of a space saver tire in the cargo compartment. Not every market would see this benefit, though. That kind of rubber was illegal in Britain at this point in time. Nissan had no choice but to use a full-size tire in the boot. This was to the dismay of Motorsport Magazine, which aired out its grievances in May of 1980. The tester couldn’t even fit a suitcase back there without removing the cargo cover. Porsche seemed to get around this issue by issuing a disclaimer as well as providing a membership to a car recovery club. The publication was at a loss as to why Nissan couldn’t take the same approach.

TIMESTAMPS

0:00 INTRODUCTION
1:25 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
6:23 MARKET RECEPTION
13:45 TURBOCHARGERS AND T-TOPS
17:54 300ZX (Z31)

VIDEO SOURCES

www.barchetta.co/280zx-sources