Jump to content

IGNORED

Was the 260Z in the US short-lived on purpose?


AndysPlit

Recommended Posts

After reading a recent thread I discovered how short the production for the 260Z (US Market) was. As we all know the 280Z debuted right after the 260, but I am wondering if Nissan had intended this all along? Judging from the few months the 260 was made, it seem like the advent of the 280 was an afterthought.....Or was the 260 planned to be a short lived production that would bridge the gap between the 240 and 280?

I'm well aware of why the 260 and 280Z came about due to emission laws, etc. I also know that the 280 was only made for the US. However, did Nissan have any foresight that by the 1975 model year they would have yet another series of Z cars?

Edited by AndysPlit
Link to comment
Share on other sites


In other parts of the world, the 260z moniker continued; but in North America, the 260z certainly seems like a transitional object and a way to use up 240z parts while transitioning to the 280z given the difference between early and late 260's and their respective similarities between 240z and 280z.

I understand that safety and pollution regulations were the main drivers for the NA changes.

I wonder if the early 260z's in other regions of the world also transitioned in a similar fashion and how regulations in those regions caused changes? (take wing/fender lights for example)

Edited by Blue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think most of the 260z's short life is due to the bumper laws. From what i can tell as late as early 1972 the bumper laws still hadn't been finalized to go into effect for the 1974 model year which i suspect was later moved to 1975. There was also a separate law in California that required 5mph bumpers beginning in 1973. Since the cars are designed and even built years ahead of time i think Datsun was caught a bit off guard and scrambled to make the already deigned 260z compliant, and then rushed the 280z into the market. I found an NTSB status report from Dec 1971 speculating about if the national bumper laws would be passed as well as the California bumper law http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr0624.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, why not just keep it a 260 with compliant bumpers? It's funny that the 280 might have been rushed just to meet regulations. After all the 280 not only had a bigger bored engine, but introduced fuel injection to the series. I guess the question I should really be asking as well is when did Nissan decide to produce a Z such as the 280?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, why not just keep it a 260 with compliant bumpers? It's funny that the 280 might have been rushed just to meet regulations. After all the 280 not only had a bigger bored engine, but introduced fuel injection to the series. I guess the question I should really be asking as well is when did Nissan decide to produce a Z such as the 280?

Was the 280z rushed? Thats really the question isnt it? Much of this is speculation collected from various things i have read online unless someone with more information can lay out Datsun's official plans. The displacement was increased partially due to reduction in performance because of the extra smog equipment, the 280z advertised less power than the 260z even with the added displacement and new fuel injection system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget about smog compliance. You cannot consider changes in NHTSA regulations without also factoring in EPA requirements when looking at changes in cars during the 60s & 70s. For instance, Honda came out with the CVCC engine in 75 for smog compliance. If you look at the EPA emissions milestones, you'll see that it wasn't a coincidence the 280Z & CVCC were both introduced in 75. So while the safety requirements were adding weight, the smog requirements were taking away power. The 280Z was designed to keep up performance as much as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was the 280z rushed? Thats really the question isnt it? Much of this is speculation collected from various things i have read online unless someone with more information can lay out Datsun's official plans. The displacement was increased partially due to reduction in performance because of the extra smog equipment, the 280z advertised less power than the 260z even with the added displacement and new fuel injection system.

The 280Z had more power than both the 260Z and 240Z. The way power was rated varied over the years. The displacement increase was mostly due to increasing weight rather than emissions requirements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think they "rushed" the 280 into production as the 260 was made through December '74 ( as mine was) and sold halfway through 75 (as mine was sold April 75). Datsun was very busy complying with new smog & crash rules and were constantly making improvements. I think they knew early on that the 260 carbs were not going to perform well for the US market with more stringent regulations and began working on fuel injection then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unleaded gasoline in 1975 requiring lower compression ratios.

Quoting Brian Long, Datsun Z, Fairlady to 280Z; "The L26 was already struggling to cope with the California emission regulations, often being difficult to start and generally tempermental whilst running. As America was the most important market for the Z-Car, Nissan decided to cure all the problems associated with the California-spec cars in one fell swoop - enter the 280Z."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, why not just keep it a 260 with compliant bumpers? It's funny that the 280 might have been rushed just to meet regulations. After all the 280 not only had a bigger bored engine, but introduced fuel injection to the series. I guess the question I should really be asking as well is when did Nissan decide to produce a Z such as the 280?

Because not only did they have to add the big bumpers to meet regulations, they also had to "beef-up" the door anti-intrusion beams, enhance the collapsable steering column and more.

All these changes made a big weight impact on the Z and negatively effceted the net horsepower, (to the wheels).

So, to maintain a similar useable horsepower, they rolled out the larger displacement 280, along with the fuel injection.

Other imported sportscars, (Like the MG and Triumph), tried to meet regulations but did nothing to increase thier horsepower. In the poor old MGB's case, they went from a base hp of almost 100 in 1973,...down to just over 60bhp after the federal regulations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because not only did they have to add the big bumpers to meet regulations, they also had to "beef-up" the door anti-intrusion beams, enhance the collapsable steering column and more.

All these changes made a big weight impact on the Z and negatively effceted the net horsepower, (to the wheels).

So, to maintain a similar useable horsepower, they rolled out the larger displacement 280, along with the fuel injection.

Other imported sportscars, (Like the MG and Triumph), tried to meet regulations but did nothing to increase thier horsepower. In the poor old MGB's case, they went from a base hp of almost 100 in 1973,...down to just over 60bhp after the federal regulations.

I think the phrase your looking for is power/weight ratio, since weight has no bearing on horsepower. But yes, you are right in that the weight increase is the big reason for increasing displacement and hence, power.

I'm not very knowledgable on the specific case of the MGB, but power rating standards in general were a bit muddy in the mid-70s. The key is comparing apples to apples, regarding net and gross SAE power ratings. This is analogous to comparing new EPA mpg numbers to the old (inflated) ones. The difference in the MGB's rated power could very well have been just on paper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Guidelines. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.