Poor man's Porche

[HS30-H]

In terms of performance, I think the Z is what inspired Porsche to increase the performance of thier cars. Nothing like getting your arse kicked by a cheap, tin Japanese upstart to make a world-recognized sports car manufacturer improve their designs...

Sorry, but I can't imagine that the Z had any effect on planning at Porsche in relation to any "increase in performance", and I cannot think of more than a couple of times when Porsche's finest might have had its "arse kicked" by an S30-series Z ( and especially by an HLS30U..... )

Before, during and after the new car sales years of the S30-series Z, Porsche always had models of superior performance. With the 911S, 911T/R, 911R, Carrera RS and Carrera RS in their lineup, it's hard to imagine that they'd feel threatened by anything much performance-wise. Nissan could offer a cheaper alternative to the image ( especially in the North American market, where Nissan purposely cut their profit margin to pile 'em high and sell 'em cheap ), but had no real answer for showroom-stock high performance models.

Let's keep it real here....

[Oiluj]

From a recent R&T article:

"at the SCCA’s 1970 American Road Race of Champions held at Road Atlanta (the precursor to the Runoffs), Morton’s C Production BRE Z won easily, defeating the likes of Bob Tullius and Lee Mueller in Triumph TR-6s, Alan Johnson in a Ginther-prepared Porsche 914-6 and Bob Sharp, who was building 240Zs out of his shop in Connecticut.

Quite a debut for the BRE car and the sleek new Z in general, which swept the top three positions that fall day at Road Atlanta. And the following year, it seemed that the harder the Zs pushed, the more the Triumphs and Porsches broke. At the 1971 ARRC, two BRE 240Zs (Morton and Dan Parkinson) were on the front row, alongside Sharp. Allan Girdler, reporting in our March 1972 issue, described Morton’s winning drive: “[He] put on an exhibition, leading all the way in his routine madman style and power always fully on, into each corner at seemingly impossible speed, out with wildly spinning tires, using all the road in the process.”

All told, Datsun Zs went on to win 10 straight SCCA C Production titles"

I'd say that says it all...

[SportBikeMike]

There was this kid who thought my 280ZX WAS a Porsche. Also I had a former gilrfriend who thought my 350Z was a Porsche (needless to say, she was blonde :stupid:).

I personally don't think a 911 can hold the candle to a 240Z. The 944 would come closer....they are great-looking cars.

To me it would make more sense if the S30 was referred to as a "poor man's Jaguar" or a "poor man's Ferrari". They look much more like those cars than they do a Porsche IMO (fortunately).

[HS30-H]

I'd say that says it all...

How is that "kicking Porsche's arse" though?

Porsche didn't ( weren't allowed to ) bring the very models that out-gunned the 240Z in the showroom.

I'm just as much a fan of 'our' cars as anyone here, but please let's not kid ourselves that the early Z was any kind of match for Porsche's finest road cars of the same period. Beating a 914, 914-6 or 911T is like beating Muhammad Ali's kid sister in a boxing match.

OK, you "beat Ali". But you beat the wrong Ali......

[FastWoman]

Arne, my neighbors sold me their BMW because they could no longer afford the maintenance. Literally, it had been sitting in their garage for a year because they could not afford the necessary repairs to get it through inspection. I bought it rather cheaply with the idea of fixing, driving for a while, and flipping. Sticker shock started with the tires, which were designed specifically for THAT car. No garden variety tires would fit. They were something like $200 each, and they were expected to have a service life of something like 15,000 miles. Then the temp sensor, which was about $70, being integral with the plastic thermostat housing. Then a hardtop... I picked up a used one cheap, but the dealer install price would have been $3000. Then an intake boot -- about $150, as I recall. Fuel filter $70. Crazy prices for tiny plastic pieces -- for instance over a buck each for tiny plastic caps that covered interior screw heads (which were almost always destroyed upon removal). These are all parts prices. I did have to take my car to the dealer to fix one very expensive problem (for free, because it was a liability issue) that I'm not allowed to discuss (because I signed an agreement). While the car was in their posession, the steering angle sensor died. They wanted $700 to replace it. After a protracted battle, I got them to fix it for free, as I think they broke it, and they had a hard time denying that. All this would have cost me another $3000 if I had paid for it. I finally sold the car for about what I had in it. It seems to fall in the "toy car" category, and its worth had dropped rather dramatically with the economic downturn. Anyway, total maintenance over the three year period between when the car was retired to my neighbor's garage and when I sold it would have been about $6000, or about $2000 a year if I had gone to the dealer for service. This would include staying on top of numerous water leaks in the top. This greatly eclipses everything I've spent on my 280Z and is roughly equal to the combined lifetime maintenance on my 1992 Saturn, including one engine and clutch rebuild, one rear-end collision, one sandwich collision, one deer collision, a $150 alternator, brake pads, an R134a compresser, and oil/filter changes.

Yeah, expensive.

Edited December 20, 2010 by FastWoman

[Oiluj]

Porsche didn't ( weren't allowed to ) bring the very models that out-gunned the 240Z in the showroom.

Interesting..., With exception of the 550, I never followed much Porsche history and would like to hear more about this.

How is that "kicking Porsche's arse" though?

I'm just as much a fan of 'our' cars as anyone here, but please let's not kid ourselves that the early Z was any kind of match for Porsche's finest road cars of the same period. Beating a 914, 914-6 or 911T is like beating Muhammad Ali's kid sister in a boxing match. OK, you "beat Ali". But you beat the wrong Ali......

To be clear, I never intended to suggest that our inexpensive, Nipponese, everyman's sports cars were in the same class as the "highest-end" cars of the day. Just that they were more than competitive when compared to their immediate rivals. That means cars within the same category. That's why we have sports car classes that limit competition between cars of similar displacement / power.

What was the price differential between the our little, tinny, upstart Z's and to what you refer to as Porsche's "finest" road cars? 2X? 3X? I submit that these cars were not direct competitors, any more than a 911 compared with a supercar like the Veyron.

So I respectfully submit that within their class, the early Z's did, in fact, kick arse. Not to mention that they also did very well in the marketplace... That's why I logically infer that a major competitor like Porsche would take notice and review the performance of their product offerings in the low-end sports car market.

I think there is validity to both our positions and I do respect your posting. I'm really not trying to convince you of anything, just stating my singular opinion. If we have a difference of opinion, that's OK.

[Arne]

Arne, my neighbors sold me their BMW because they could no longer afford the maintenance...

...Anyway, total maintenance over the three year period between when the car was retired to my neighbor's garage and when I sold it would have been about $6000, or about $2000 a year if I had gone to the dealer for service.

Well, that certainly does not jive with my experiences. I just pulled up my spreadsheet on the 328i. Over the 8 years I owned it (about 85k miles), I spent just under $5000 on it, and that included a set of winter tires and wheels, 2 sets of 17" summer tires, and even one $700 bill when I paid to have the rear main seal replaced (didn't have time to do it myself). No failures, and if you shop around (don't use the dealer), the few parts it needed were quite affordable.

Oh well, YMMV...

Edited December 20, 2010 by Arne

[Oiluj]

Arne,

One observation. You are a "car guy", do much of your own work and take very good care of your cars.

I'd venture a guess that many Bimmer owners never look under the hood after they buy one, then expect Honda/Toyota reliability and just drive them till they break.

That might explain the difference in your experience.

Same could be said for many cars. British cars had a terrible reliability reputation in the US. I found my MGA to be very reliable, but understood that it required more maintenance than the average Toyota to achieve that level of reliability.

Just my 2 cents.

[FastWoman]

Oddly, the aforementioned bimmer was only serviced by the dealer before I bought it. Whenever the "check engine" light went on, it went to the dealer. I think the nearly $1000 in new tires (to pass inspection) was the straw that broke the camel's back for my neighbors. So I got the car in approximately decent shape, except for a few little engine problems that had to be diagnosed -- probably from setting up so long. I also had to clean a lot of varnish out of the engine and fix the leaky top.

On another thread, someone mentions $150 in oil change parts/supplies for a bimmer M. Wow! (I bought aftermarket filters, which were still quite expensive.) He also mentions always lubing up really well before going to the dealer, because he knows what's coming. Yeah, I can imagine.

Even Volkswagen owners complain about expensive parts, which are markedly cheaper than the Porsche parts, even when they are the same part under a different label/number.

I'm sorry, but precious, antique, almost NLA, genuine Nissan parts are way cheaper than recent-production bimmer parts. No contest.

Edited December 21, 2010 by FastWoman

[Oiluj]

FastWoman,

I perceive you to be like Arne in that you take care of your cars. One thing I can say is that not all dealer mechanics are created equal. I've seen some real "certified" hacks over the years.

[Arne]

Arne,

One observation. You are a "car guy", do much of your own work and take very good care of your cars.

I'd venture a guess that many Bimmer owners never look under the hood after they buy one, then expect Honda/Toyota reliability and just drive them till they break.

That might explain the difference in your experience.

Certainly a possibility. I do try to take care of my cars properly. But my experiences with the BMWs have not been just a bit different, but almost polar opposite than what many people complain about. And other than the motorcycle, I've never bought a new BMW, so there have always been prior owners involved.

Same could be said for many cars. British cars had a terrible reliability reputation in the US. I found my MGA to be very reliable, but understood that it required more maintenance than the average Toyota to achieve that level of reliability.

Also true. I drove my MGB as my DD for over 4 years straight. No breakdowns, no failures. Never left me stranded. Of course, since I bought it as a basket case, I worked it over mechanically quite thoroughly before I started using it that way.

Oddly, the aforementioned bimmer was only serviced by the dealer before I bought it. Whenever the "check engine" light went on, it went to the dealer.

How odd. I had only one CEL in 8 years, for a bad O2 sensor. Lost a water pump once, too. Bought a cooling system rebuild kit for it - new Behr radiator, new pump, new radiator hoses, both serpentine belts, thermostat and replacement metal t-stat housing. I paid - wait for it -- a total of $250 + shipping for the entire kit. All good, German OE brands. Sorry, try getting all that for your Datsun for $250.

I think the nearly $1000 in new tires (to pass inspection) was the straw that broke the camel's back for my neighbors.

Put 17" wheels on your 280Z and see how much tires cost you.

On another thread, someone mentions $150 in oil change parts/supplies for a bimmer M.

??? I bought my filters for the 328i (same as all the 6 cylinder M3s here in the US) from the dealer - they were less than $10 each and came with new o-rings and crush washers. That and six quarts of synthetic and you're done.

Even Volkswagen owners complain about expensive parts, which are markedly cheaper than the Porsche parts, even when they are the same part under a different label/number.

Don't buy this one either - and I've owned one or more VWs continuously since 1979. On my sixth one now. Do people expect to get parts for a modern car for pocket change?

I'm sorry, but precious, antique, almost NLA, genuine Nissan parts are way cheaper than recent-production bimmer parts. No contest.

Not in my experience. Maybe about the same, but not cheaper. Edited December 21, 2010 by Arne

[HS30-H]

To be clear, I never intended to suggest that our inexpensive, Nipponese, everyman's sports cars were in the same class as the "highest-end" cars of the day. Just that they were more than competitive when compared to their immediate rivals. That means cars within the same category. That's why we have sports car classes that limit competition between cars of similar displacement / power.

Yes, I can see your viewpoint, but I still think that - looking at the big picture - the S30-series Z will have had little impact on thinking at Porsche, apart from the aspect of 'Bang For Buck'. However, as the recommended selling price of the S30-series Z was set at an artificially low level in the north American market, I can't see how that affected Porsche's product planning too much. If anything, factors such as the 1973 Oil Crisis would have had more effect.

What was the price differential between the our little, tinny, upstart Z's and to what you refer to as Porsche's "finest" road cars? 2X? 3X? I submit that these cars were not direct competitors, any more than a 911 compared with a supercar like the Veyron.

So I respectfully submit that within their class, the early Z's did, in fact, kick arse. Not to mention that they also did very well in the marketplace... That's why I logically infer that a major competitor like Porsche would take notice and review the performance of their product offerings in the low-end sports car market.

Looks to me as though the goalposts are being moved around a little though....

In my opinion, high performance models like the 911S, 911R, Carrera RS and others are automatically brought into the equation when you come up with a phrase like "kicking Porsche's arse" in connection with the S30-series Z in SCCA racing. I think it would be more appropriate to say that the Z kicked the 914-6's "arse" rather than Porsche's. Price is only one factor, and I would definitely say that a 911 should be looked at as being in the same category as a 240Z in the showroom. Kats was asking about the phrase "poor man's Porsche" in his original post, and I don't think that phrase originally referred to the 914 or 914-6. It was the higher-level versions of the 911 that were the benchmarks.

The 'Datsun 240Z' used in SCCA C Production racing was - theoretically at least - the best product that Nissan could offer in the USA market at the time ( although it might be worth remembering that the HLS30U wasn't the fastest or most dynamic showroom stock iteration of the S30-series Z..... ), whilst Porsche's best were forced into different racing categories. In the showroom Nissan had no answer to Porsche, and it's no disgrace to Nissan. They were quite different companies, with quite different philosophies. You could just as easily turn this on its head and ask where Porsche's pickups, four door econoboxes and luxury sedans were of course.

So I respectfully submit that within their class, the early Z's did, in fact, kick arse. Not to mention that they also did very well in the marketplace... That's why I logically infer that a major competitor like Porsche would take notice and review the performance of their product offerings in the low-end sports car market.

I think there is validity to both our positions and I do respect your posting. I'm really not trying to convince you of anything, just stating my singular opinion. If we have a difference of opinion, that's OK.

The reason I react to anything I perceive as 'Porsche bashing' on this - and other - Z forums ( I've seen it before ) is that I think that there's a danger of us becoming inverted snobs. As I said before, I think I love 'our' cars just as much as anybody here, but a company such as Porsche - particularly during that period when the S30-series Z was being sold new in the showroom - has to be looked up to for its dedication to a particular market sector and its dedication to motorsport. It was wonderful to see a Z beating a Porsche in the few times that it has happened, but it really has - in the grand scheme of things - been only just a few times.....

Cheers,

Alan T.