280ZX (S130) Forums Dedicated to 79-83 ZCars

overall difference between 2+2 and non 2+2

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 22, 2005 | 08:30 PM
  #1  
duowing's Avatar
Thread Starter
NisTuner
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,800
From: Cleveland, Ohio
overall difference between 2+2 and non 2+2

So here I am bored, it's storming outside, and thinking about how I've gotta go rewire my speakers to get them to work with my CD player. Anyway I was wondering one thing. Essentially if you have a 2+2 with the turbo engine and the T5 tranny. If you compared this to the same year 280ZX that was the 2 seater with a Turbo engine and the T5 tranny, would their be a noticeable difference? Does the extra length and the backseat really add that much extra weight that you would see a significant difference between the 280ZX and the 280ZX 2+2? One other thing I was wondering, would it be feasible to take the backseat out of the 2+2 and almost convert the car into a normal 280ZX that's just slightly longer? Or would there be still major differences?
Old Sep 22, 2005 | 08:44 PM
  #2  
NismoPick's Avatar
The Good Twin
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 20,639
From: Wild Wild West, UTAH!
2+2's are heavier & have a longer wheel base. That is the only diff. The back seat to 2seater conversion has already been done... by me.
Attached Thumbnails overall difference between 2+2 and non 2+2-2-2-converted-2-seater.jpg  
Old Sep 22, 2005 | 08:50 PM
  #3  
duowing's Avatar
Thread Starter
NisTuner
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,800
From: Cleveland, Ohio
Do you have the conversion fully done? I'd like to see pics of it completed, but even though it's longer and heavier, is it that much heavier that it would be a noticeable performance difference from a regular 2 seater turbo?
Old Sep 22, 2005 | 08:51 PM
  #4  
RubberBerner's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 126
From: St. Petersburg & Orlando Florida
Its a massive empty abyss! What's going to go there? a nice roll cage would fill it up nicely.
Old Sep 22, 2005 | 10:20 PM
  #5  
RodMoyes's Avatar
Doesn't post much...
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,617
From: Escondido (San Diego) California
The Diference... that's easy.

One is cool, the other is really cool.

Rod.
Old Sep 23, 2005 | 01:27 PM
  #6  
NismoZigma's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 63
From: NJ
I gotta 2+2 and it looks ALOT longer than the 2 seater. I dont know why. Anyways I love the thing cause the seats fold and its very spacious to put stuff in the back.
Old Sep 23, 2005 | 01:32 PM
  #7  
NismoPick's Avatar
The Good Twin
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 20,639
From: Wild Wild West, UTAH!
Originally Posted by NismoZigma
I gotta 2+2 and it looks ALOT longer than the 2 seater. I dont know why.
I'm gunna have to say BECAUSE IT IS LONGER...
Old Sep 23, 2005 | 01:41 PM
  #8  
duowing's Avatar
Thread Starter
NisTuner
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,800
From: Cleveland, Ohio
the seat folds?
Old Sep 23, 2005 | 02:01 PM
  #9  
NismoPick's Avatar
The Good Twin
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 20,639
From: Wild Wild West, UTAH!
yeah... the backs fold down to make a larger cargo area. most 2 door 4 seaters do that.
Old Sep 23, 2005 | 02:01 PM
  #10  
FubarI33t's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,053
From: Southaven Mississippi
lol, Yes the rear seats fold. They fold down flat.
Old Sep 23, 2005 | 11:34 PM
  #11  
81 Black L28E's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,046
From: squwamton
The Diference
AND KEEP IN MIND THAT I HAVE DRIVEN AND OWNED BOTH

1+1's = TOPEND KILLER

2+2's = KICK OUT KING


The 2 seaters are lighter and seem to pull a little more in the top end

The 2+2 's are heavier and seem to kick out in the corner eazyer

I wouldn't trade my 2 seater for anything.. But i do miss old blue 2+2 once and awhile.


ALSO 1+1's = sexy goddessssss

2+2's = Drifting madman

Last edited by 81 Black L28E; Sep 23, 2005 at 11:59 PM.
Old Sep 23, 2005 | 11:47 PM
  #12  
RubberBerner's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 126
From: St. Petersburg & Orlando Florida
anybody know the weight ratio's of both? (If anything you can use your door sill sticker to calculate it)
Old Sep 24, 2005 | 05:38 PM
  #13  
jfairladyz's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,485
From: Temecula, CA
Advertised for the 2seater is 50/50. Don't know how accurate that is though, never actually put one on the scales. I'd imagine the 2+2 to be a little more nose heavy. Seems like it would be the opposite but if you think about it when moving the rear wheels further back, you make everthing in front of the rear seats (since thats all the same as the 2seater) more biased toward the front of the car. But then again all that extra weight thats added with the 2+2 may just even things out again.
Old Sep 24, 2005 | 10:42 PM
  #14  
lww's Avatar
lww
Head Muckraker
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 9,221
From: Bay Area
2+2's have a smaller gas tank as well.
Old Sep 24, 2005 | 10:50 PM
  #15  
FubarI33t's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,053
From: Southaven Mississippi
most 2+2's have a fuel freindly rear Diff also. 3.54 gearing, 2 seater has 3.90 gearing.
Old Sep 24, 2005 | 11:12 PM
  #16  
duowing's Avatar
Thread Starter
NisTuner
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,800
From: Cleveland, Ohio
Anybody know actual weights of the 2 seater vs. 2+2?
Old Sep 24, 2005 | 11:22 PM
  #17  
NismoPick's Avatar
The Good Twin
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 20,639
From: Wild Wild West, UTAH!
here's a link that might clear up some confusion / questions. tho it doesn't have the 2+2 weight, I imagine 2+2's weigh a couple hundred lbs more (unless stripped).

http://www.geocities.com/~z-car/specs/
Old Sep 24, 2005 | 11:31 PM
  #18  
duowing's Avatar
Thread Starter
NisTuner
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,800
From: Cleveland, Ohio
So overall the differences in terms of speed and acceleration shouldn't be much different between a 2+2 and a 2+0 with the same Transmission and differential gearing?
Old Sep 24, 2005 | 11:33 PM
  #19  
NismoPick's Avatar
The Good Twin
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 20,639
From: Wild Wild West, UTAH!
not a noticable diff... maybe .05 sec on the 0-60 time.
Old Sep 25, 2005 | 10:00 AM
  #20  
duowing's Avatar
Thread Starter
NisTuner
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,800
From: Cleveland, Ohio
See that's what I was wondering, like I was wondering if the extra weight difference was really going to cause that big of a perfomance difference. Cus I would like to one day turbo my Z. I'm thinking well if there's going to be a big difference, then maybe when I plan to turbo I should look for a 2 seater.
Old Sep 25, 2005 | 10:14 AM
  #21  
NismoPick's Avatar
The Good Twin
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 20,639
From: Wild Wild West, UTAH!
Originally Posted by duowing
See that's what I was wondering, like I was wondering if the extra weight difference was really going to cause that big of a perfomance difference. Cus I would like to one day turbo my Z. I'm thinking well if there's going to be a big difference, then maybe when I plan to turbo I should look for a 2 seater.
I really don't think it will make a diff. IMO: I've driven 2seater turbos & I gotta say that I love how my 2+2 feels. I wouldn't trade it for a 2seater now. It just depends on your opinion... IT'S YOUR CAR.
Old Sep 25, 2005 | 11:09 AM
  #22  
duowing's Avatar
Thread Starter
NisTuner
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,800
From: Cleveland, Ohio
Thanks Nismo. I really love my 280ZX 2+2. It's just kind of hard to really love it when people seem to be a little harder and more biased against the 2+2's. I guess all in all it really doesn't matter. A Z is a Z, and I should treat the Z like it's meant to be regardless of it being a 2+2 or not.
Old Sep 25, 2005 | 02:20 PM
  #23  
Z*Tech's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 82
From: Seattle, Wa
Got a german shepard that hates the coupe and loves the 2+2, with the seat locked down, so he has a place the lay down.

Being that he's got bigger teeth than I do, I tend to drive the 2+2. It's not too bad at all really.
Old Sep 25, 2005 | 02:38 PM
  #24  
RodMoyes's Avatar
Doesn't post much...
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,617
From: Escondido (San Diego) California
Originally Posted by NismoPick
not a noticable diff... maybe .05 sec on the 0-60 time.
Did you really mean .05 or did you mean 0.5? I'm thinking it's more like 0.5 at best. Weight is the enemy! I would think that even the extra 1 or 2 hundred pounds (maybe more) that the 2+2 has over the 2 seater would equate to more than 1/20th of a second difference...

Rod.

Last edited by RodMoyes; Sep 27, 2005 at 12:51 AM.
Old Sep 27, 2005 | 12:25 AM
  #25  
ZedZilla's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 239
From: Vancouver, BC
Hey Rod.....Wanna RACE! Remember I beat out a PT Cruiser GT before!!!!



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:57 PM.