If you had a choice
05-13-2011, 07:33 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2
If you had a choice
Hello. I'm an old Nissan fan and have had several Nissan Maximas in my past (two 91 SE's, and one 92 SE). I also had a 2004 G35 6MT that I really enjoyed before going to a 545i, which I presently drive as a daily driver and will keep.
I have been contemplating the purchase of a Z32, specifically a 94 to 96. I located two that I like and was wondering if you had the choice, which you would opt for and why:
option 1: 1994 300ZX N/A manual 5 spd. 140K miles, in very good condition. Price: $5,800
option 2: 1996 300ZX Twin Turbo Automatic. 39K miles, in excellent condition. Price: $15,000.
Both have been responsibly driven, garage kept. I love the manual transmission, but I also really would like the twin turbos. I'm struggling on which direction to go and would appreciate your tips. Would it be smart to spend money on a twin turbo conversion on the '94? Would it be smart to spend money for a 5 speed conversion on the '96? Or should I just accept the car for what it is or continue my search? What are your thoughts on the prices?
Thank you in advance for your input and your time.
I have been contemplating the purchase of a Z32, specifically a 94 to 96. I located two that I like and was wondering if you had the choice, which you would opt for and why:
option 1: 1994 300ZX N/A manual 5 spd. 140K miles, in very good condition. Price: $5,800
option 2: 1996 300ZX Twin Turbo Automatic. 39K miles, in excellent condition. Price: $15,000.
Both have been responsibly driven, garage kept. I love the manual transmission, but I also really would like the twin turbos. I'm struggling on which direction to go and would appreciate your tips. Would it be smart to spend money on a twin turbo conversion on the '94? Would it be smart to spend money for a 5 speed conversion on the '96? Or should I just accept the car for what it is or continue my search? What are your thoughts on the prices?
Thank you in advance for your input and your time.
05-13-2011, 08:45 PM
#5
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2
Nismo - Thanks for the welcome.
Blue: That thought has crossed my mind. What kind of estimated cost would I be looking at?
Zlover: Good point on the '96. OBDII, No VTC. However, on my VE30DE '92 Maxima SE, this would have been a good thing due to the inherent sprocket failures on the VTC's on that engine. Does the VG30DE have that problem? It doesn't appear so. I wouldn't be that broken up over a 20 hp loss.
Blue: That thought has crossed my mind. What kind of estimated cost would I be looking at?
Zlover: Good point on the '96. OBDII, No VTC. However, on my VE30DE '92 Maxima SE, this would have been a good thing due to the inherent sprocket failures on the VTC's on that engine. Does the VG30DE have that problem? It doesn't appear so. I wouldn't be that broken up over a 20 hp loss.
05-14-2011, 07:32 PM
#6
Encyclopedic Knowledge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Naperville, IL
Posts: 3,316
It's not a 20hp loss... in fact, there's no peak horsepower loss at the stock level, because VTC is for low-end power production, so peak power is unaffected (this has been dyno-confirmed).
However, it makes it HUGELY more difficult to modify. The exhaust flanges are pivoted differently, the emissions testing is far more strict (my state doesn't even test OBDI cars, for example), and tuning the ECU for more power is HUGELY more complicated (it wasn't until a few years ago that there was an aftermarket ECU for 5-speed 96TT's, and I still don't think there is one for automatics). If you plan to keep the car stock (lol) then a 96 is fine... but if you want to make any more power with it, the 96 will be a hassle between the requirement of custom tuning and having to pass stricter emissions testing.
However, it makes it HUGELY more difficult to modify. The exhaust flanges are pivoted differently, the emissions testing is far more strict (my state doesn't even test OBDI cars, for example), and tuning the ECU for more power is HUGELY more complicated (it wasn't until a few years ago that there was an aftermarket ECU for 5-speed 96TT's, and I still don't think there is one for automatics). If you plan to keep the car stock (lol) then a 96 is fine... but if you want to make any more power with it, the 96 will be a hassle between the requirement of custom tuning and having to pass stricter emissions testing.
Last edited by ZLover4Life; 05-14-2011 at 07:38 PM.
05-17-2011, 06:45 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Salisbury, MD
Posts: 228
Get the 96 TT. Looks like it was well kept anyway and it doesn't sound like you're planning a big mod with this car anytime soon. Just drive it as is, don't bother messing around with the tranny until it really needs messing around with. If you plan to mod to the extent that ZLover mentioned, then skip the 96.
05-30-2011, 07:11 PM
#9
Encyclopedic Knowledge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Naperville, IL
Posts: 3,316
Just some support for my anti-96 sentiment (for the one or two new members who join in the future and actually search for answers rather than post them)
From the May 24, 2011, post by Specialty Z
http://specialtyz.com/blog/
The 96 is just more difficult to make good power with, and that's all there is to it.
From the May 24, 2011, post by Specialty Z
http://specialtyz.com/blog/
Owning a 1996 300ZX means having to live with OBD-II. Although OBD-II today is a great tuning tool for newer car models, the 96' Z was left in the dust. 1996 was the first year OBD-II was implemented in North America and it was also the last year the 300ZX was produced in North America. This left the 96 a red headed step-child when it came to easy breezy modifications like its younger kind. The 1996 year had ... less aggressive camshafts on both the intake and exhaust for both the MT and AT alike (totally different than any of the other years). The 90-95 MT cam spec for duration is 248 on the intake and 248 on the exhaust. The AT 90-95 has a 240 intake and 248 exhaust. Drum roll for the 96............ they use a 232 intake and 240 exhaust! They also have less lift then the earlier Zs. No VTC system (Nissan's Variable Cam Timing) also hurts power all around. The 96s also use their own special OBD-II ECUs which are tougher to tune and throw codes for non emissions friendly mods. So some have resorted to retro fit their 96s to 95 specs as far as the wiring, ECU, and cam setup goes. This maybe an easy option for some but in states like California it's a tough option to go through with. Talk about some bad odds.
Enter Alex. He has a 96 Z32 TT and has the mod bug. Alex has been our customer for almost 10 years now and he's slowly turned the wick up throughout the years. This past December he wanted to "bump" it up some with the way of our 3" 4-Bolt Downpipes (Stock Turbos), 3"to 2.5" Test Pipes, Ash 2.5" I\C Piping (w\ SZ Outlet Pipes) & Massives, Selin Dual POP, Nismo 740cc Injectors, Z1 Throttle Bodies, J-Spec Bumper, and some cooling mods for the track (auto-x & road course) duty.
Here's where it gets interesting. Exposing the shortcomings of modifying a 96 TT. Increasing boost and fuel octane (100) did nothing for it. Easily seen here are the boost differences between the 91 octane tune on 14.7 psi and 100 octane on almost 19 psi. Gains are seen early on between the two only until about 5800 RPMs. After 5800 RPMs the engine cannot efficiently make use of the added boost. (Courtesy of the cams and lift - ZLover) Running the engine at this level will only add stress to it. The cursor on the graph shows the differences at 6000 RPMs. Boost is 12.78 psi on 91 octane and 16.74 on 100 octane. One would expect more power but that is not the case. On 12 psi the engine is more efficient making power and torque. It makes 20 more HP & torque on less boost (12 psi). To make use of the quirky 96 and 100 octane would be to limit boost past 5800 RPMs.
Enter Alex. He has a 96 Z32 TT and has the mod bug. Alex has been our customer for almost 10 years now and he's slowly turned the wick up throughout the years. This past December he wanted to "bump" it up some with the way of our 3" 4-Bolt Downpipes (Stock Turbos), 3"to 2.5" Test Pipes, Ash 2.5" I\C Piping (w\ SZ Outlet Pipes) & Massives, Selin Dual POP, Nismo 740cc Injectors, Z1 Throttle Bodies, J-Spec Bumper, and some cooling mods for the track (auto-x & road course) duty.
Here's where it gets interesting. Exposing the shortcomings of modifying a 96 TT. Increasing boost and fuel octane (100) did nothing for it. Easily seen here are the boost differences between the 91 octane tune on 14.7 psi and 100 octane on almost 19 psi. Gains are seen early on between the two only until about 5800 RPMs. After 5800 RPMs the engine cannot efficiently make use of the added boost. (Courtesy of the cams and lift - ZLover) Running the engine at this level will only add stress to it. The cursor on the graph shows the differences at 6000 RPMs. Boost is 12.78 psi on 91 octane and 16.74 on 100 octane. One would expect more power but that is not the case. On 12 psi the engine is more efficient making power and torque. It makes 20 more HP & torque on less boost (12 psi). To make use of the quirky 96 and 100 octane would be to limit boost past 5800 RPMs.
05-30-2011, 07:11 PM
#10
Encyclopedic Knowledge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Naperville, IL
Posts: 3,316
Just some support for my anti-96 sentiment (for the one or two new members who join in the future and actually search for answers rather than post them)
From the May 24, 2011, post by Specialty Z
http://specialtyz.com/blog/
The 96 is just more difficult to make good power with, and that's all there is to it.
From the May 24, 2011, post by Specialty Z
http://specialtyz.com/blog/
Owning a 1996 300ZX means having to live with OBD-II. Although OBD-II today is a great tuning tool for newer car models, the 96' Z was left in the dust. 1996 was the first year OBD-II was implemented in North America and it was also the last year the 300ZX was produced in North America. This left the 96 a red headed step-child when it came to easy breezy modifications like its younger kind. The 1996 year had ... less aggressive camshafts on both the intake and exhaust for both the MT and AT alike (totally different than any of the other years). The 90-95 MT cam spec for duration is 248 on the intake and 248 on the exhaust. The AT 90-95 has a 240 intake and 248 exhaust. Drum roll for the 96............ they use a 232 intake and 240 exhaust! They also have less lift then the earlier Zs. No VTC system (Nissan's Variable Cam Timing) also hurts power all around. The 96s also use their own special OBD-II ECUs which are tougher to tune and throw codes for non emissions friendly mods. So some have resorted to retro fit their 96s to 95 specs as far as the wiring, ECU, and cam setup goes. This maybe an easy option for some but in states like California it's a tough option to go through with. Talk about some bad odds.
Enter Alex. He has a 96 Z32 TT and has the mod bug. Alex has been our customer for almost 10 years now and he's slowly turned the wick up throughout the years. This past December he wanted to "bump" it up some with the way of our 3" 4-Bolt Downpipes (Stock Turbos), 3"to 2.5" Test Pipes, Ash 2.5" I\C Piping (w\ SZ Outlet Pipes) & Massives, Selin Dual POP, Nismo 740cc Injectors, Z1 Throttle Bodies, J-Spec Bumper, and some cooling mods for the track (auto-x & road course) duty.
Here's where it gets interesting. Exposing the shortcomings of modifying a 96 TT. Increasing boost and fuel octane (100) did nothing for it. Easily seen here are the boost differences between the 91 octane tune on 14.7 psi and 100 octane on almost 19 psi. Gains are seen early on between the two only until about 5800 RPMs. After 5800 RPMs the engine cannot efficiently make use of the added boost. (Courtesy of the cams and lift - ZLover) Running the engine at this level will only add stress to it. The cursor on the graph shows the differences at 6000 RPMs. Boost is 12.78 psi on 91 octane and 16.74 on 100 octane. One would expect more power but that is not the case. On 12 psi the engine is more efficient making power and torque. It makes 20 more HP & torque on less boost (12 psi). To make use of the quirky 96 and 100 octane would be to limit boost past 5800 RPMs.
Enter Alex. He has a 96 Z32 TT and has the mod bug. Alex has been our customer for almost 10 years now and he's slowly turned the wick up throughout the years. This past December he wanted to "bump" it up some with the way of our 3" 4-Bolt Downpipes (Stock Turbos), 3"to 2.5" Test Pipes, Ash 2.5" I\C Piping (w\ SZ Outlet Pipes) & Massives, Selin Dual POP, Nismo 740cc Injectors, Z1 Throttle Bodies, J-Spec Bumper, and some cooling mods for the track (auto-x & road course) duty.
Here's where it gets interesting. Exposing the shortcomings of modifying a 96 TT. Increasing boost and fuel octane (100) did nothing for it. Easily seen here are the boost differences between the 91 octane tune on 14.7 psi and 100 octane on almost 19 psi. Gains are seen early on between the two only until about 5800 RPMs. After 5800 RPMs the engine cannot efficiently make use of the added boost. (Courtesy of the cams and lift - ZLover) Running the engine at this level will only add stress to it. The cursor on the graph shows the differences at 6000 RPMs. Boost is 12.78 psi on 91 octane and 16.74 on 100 octane. One would expect more power but that is not the case. On 12 psi the engine is more efficient making power and torque. It makes 20 more HP & torque on less boost (12 psi). To make use of the quirky 96 and 100 octane would be to limit boost past 5800 RPMs.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Bookmarks
