NA Z31 vs. V6 S12

I'm curious how these two cars compare.  The Z31 was what, 100-200 lb heavier?
It seems that the powertrains and suspensions were quite similar.
What about rigidity, weight distribution, etc.?
Obviously the S12 was much cheaper and you didn't get the choice of T-tops or how many seats it had.
But wasn't the performance about the same?

And say you want to do an engine swap, like an RB or something.  Would you say that the Z31 and the S12 would be a very similar choice?

I like the s12 better; I think its a little more discrete and unusual than the Z31.

I wouldn't know which chassis was stiffer. But I sort of think the Z31 would be a better choice. I think the front wheels are positioned farther forward in relation to the engine than the S12. And I also believe the wheelbase is shorter.

My hag ups with the Z are...

One; the styling. I think the car is somewhat unattractive, particularly the roof, and rear quarter windows. And on top of that, its too sporty for the amount of ass the car typically carries in most examples - looks faster than it is.

Two; its a six. While I'm not opposed to sixes, I personally don't have the reason to own one - as I own both an eight and a four, sixes for me just get too overlapped, and don't make sense. Particularly a 2-valve six. I'd rather have a 4-valve four. And most won't respond to a six to four swap in a car.

But like I said, One would probably be farther ahead, albeit slightly, with a Z31 as opposed to an S12. Only the S12 is cool, the z31 is common.

He was comparing the straight six Z31 with the V6 S12.  Both are six cylinder motors.

I personally would've thought the S12 to be stiffer.  Having the t-top in a Z is going to decrease it rigidity a bit, but I suppose so does a sunroof in an S12.

I prefer the look of a modified Z31 to an S12, but I'd prefer an S12 overall.

The Z31 is heavier, but appears to have better weight balance than the S12, which was designed for a much smaller engine. It also seems to have a stiffer chassis (affixed to a softer suspension from the factory) and the two-seater does have a shorter wheelbase  than the S12. (91" vs 96") The t-top does not seem to affect torsional rigidity as much as one would imagine and this is likely because Nissan designed the car's chassis around the open roof idea. Even still, slicktop Z31s do exist.

Between the two, I'd probably go with the Z31, because it was designed as a unit and I frankly think the facelifted version looks better than the S12. (T-tops, bitches!) For an S12, I'd probably go turbo four and play to the S12's strengths. The weight of a V6 throws off the balanced chassis the S12 has. Also, the Z31 was designed to be turbocharged, so there's no finagling around when blowing it. As an added bonus, its aftermarket is bigger due to sheer numbers and economies of scale.

If I were building an S12, I'd stay away from the SE. While the SE has novelty factor, getting the kind of horsepower you'd want out of the engine is difficult with its cramped engine bay, and the weight balance issue would have to be addressed to a greater extent.

As for the RB issue, jamming one into a Z31 is easier.

It sounds like you favor the Z31 unless its powered by a 4-cylinder.  But man, do people hate these cars.  And around here they don't go for super cheap because if they're not rusty, they're rare.
I concur with most points - especially that T-Tops are great.  In fact one of the main reasons I'm considering getting one is for the T-Tops.  They're so great for cruising around.

spiderwebfx on 02:40:23 PM / 23-Mar-13He was comparing the straight six Z31 with the V6 S12.  Both are six cylinder motors.

I personally would've thought the S12 to be stiffer.  Having the t-top in a Z is going to decrease it rigidity a bit, but I suppose so does a sunroof in an S12.

I prefer the look of a modified Z31 to an S12, but I'd prefer an S12 overall.

The S12 is just not the performance car we'd like to think it is. The suspension is bad, the chassis isn't as stiff as it should be, the brakes aren't great, and the power-weight ratio is just not all that good. While the Z31 suffers from a number of the same issues, it has a larger aftermarket to make up for that, and came in a turbocharged model that has something like 50 more hp off the line. The S12, and especially the SE, don't have these benefits.

The Z31 isn't much of a canyon carver, but as a grand tourer from the mid-80s it's not bad. It's a pleasurable car to just drive, if not to drive very quickly. That's why it has t-tops. As far as a sunroof goes to affect structural integrity, many cars have extra bracing to make up for the sunroof's structural loss, and t-top cars almost always do. The problem becomes less one of torsional rigidity in a case like that, and more a case of additional chassis weight. The glass panel on the roof is heavier than the sheet metal that was once there, and the chassis bracing adds weight as well. And this is weight that can't be easily shed. That's why convertibles are less desirable for performance builds than hardtops. They're a lot heavier.

I reiterate: If I was going to get a V6 Nissan from the 80s, it'd be a Z31. They're a better platform for the engine. If I were going to build an 80s Nissan canyon carver, I'd go S12 XE and swap to a turbocharged 4. They're a better platform for the type of driving.

SchizophrenicMC on 09:33:03 PM / 23-Mar-13The S12 is just not the performance car we'd like to think it is.

cory matthews on 08:38:01 PM / 23-Mar-13No, I'm talking about the V6. The 280zx had a straight six here in the US but the 300zx didn't (in the US).

spiderwebfx on 12:28:47 AM / 24-Mar-13I was referring to JonB talking about four cylinder S12's when you are comparing the V6 S12 to a straight 6 Z31.  300ZX/Z32 was never mentioned.

SchizophrenicMC on 12:33:03 AM / 24-Mar-13The Z31 was only ever offered in the US with the VG30. The S130 was the last Z offered with a straight 6 in the US. Cory's comparing the V6 S12 to the V6 Z31.

Yeah, no 200ZR for us :(

I_heart_VVL on 04:58:14 PM / 24-Mar-13Yeah, no 200ZR for us :(

BRZ will give you full blown AIDS

wat

I think this thread is kind of dumb.....I loved my z31 but I would take a vg s12 over a z31 if it was a manual and I wasnt planning on doing much more to the engine besides intake and exhaust. if you were to build a turbo s12 of any sort I would swap a sr or ka. I like the ka for a daily and for autox na because it is light cheap and reliable. I would love a low mile se though for blasting around in.

Weight difference between an SE-V6 S12 and an NA Z31 is between 350-450 pounds.

A stock SE-V6 S12 is neck and neck with a stock Z31T.  Because of the power to weight ratio.

Assuming all involved are clean-condition cars, I would differ depending on Mark I or Mark II.

Mark I, both cars: I would pick the Z. Don't get me wrong, I love the Mark I S12 but the Z was a more refined car and would be more comfortable to drive.

But this isn't a thread about Mark I S12's, so...

Mark II, both cars: I'd pick the S12. The SE was the best visual refinement for S12, and the e fine was a nice touch. It noe looks the part of the Z. In contrast,I thought the visual refinements in Mark II Z31 lessened its aggressive appearance.

Mark II S12 vs Mark I Z31 NA: This is a tough call... to me, the first trim Z31 represented the logical translation of the Z car into the mid-80s, but still looked like it has whispers of 280ZX in it. As a Z fan, I liked this. It's the same reason why I can't stand Z34 headlights or taillights. I think I would still pick the S12 SE because it really is the most visually complete version of an S12, plus of course the engine.

It has less to do with performance comparisons and more to do with overall package from a driver's perspective. To me, the SE finally brought a touch of class and flair to the S12, along with a (finally) respectable powerplant. The Mark II interiors were fitted with more reasonable cloth patterns and colors, and the exterior refinements truly took advantage of the chassis (for the first time). The responsiveness of the V6 under hood would have made this a much more enjoyable car to drive, and I suspect the chassis would have been felt to be more *direct* in feeling the road.

Edit: Given this were 1985, and I was choosing a car to buy that was within this sort of area of car, I don't think back then that I would have bought an S12. The Z31 was more exciting. But then I don't think I would have bought an NA Z31, either. Honestly, that was 1983, and I probably would have bought a used 280ZX Turbo 2-seater instead.

However... were it 1987, I would have bought the S12. I probably would have put it in my top 5 of interested cars, and the NA Z31 Mark II wouldn't have been in that list at all. But it would have been pitted against the RX-7 and the Toyota Supra, which would have been tough... given that I wasn't going to tune it, and just wanted something fun to daily drive... I would have looked at the dealer sticker and seen that the SE gets way better gas mileage than either of those other cars, and has plenty of power on tap (for its time). I would have noticed it was the same engine as the Z31, and I probably would have noticed it was a smaller car with less weight inside in terms of panelling (much simpler interior means less weight). I would have seen the power windows and been happy for that. I would have figured that with the NA Z-car engine, the S12 would be quicker by a bit, and I would have driven one, heard the grunt, and been sold. Even back then, people were putting Flowmasters and other free flowing mufflers on. I would have done that immediately. And I would have been driving a growly little beast with some clean looks, and something most people weren't in the know about even then.

Yeah, I'd have rocked an SE as a choice. Nobody else had exciting cars with those specs back then, or they were FWD. Which back then, most auto enthusiasts didn't take seriously because everyone knew the switch to FWD was for manufacturing cost reduction and not performance, and nobody had really seened a "tuned" FWD before, or enough to prove the platform.

Only one car might have possibly stood up to challenge the SE for my buying interest back then: The 1987 Shelby Dodge Daytona Turbo II. It was also a hatchback with plenty of room and fold-down seats, easier to get out of seats and doorway, AIRBAG standard, and it looked amazing. And it had 175 hp on tap.

Having driven one and owned one, I can tell you... the SE would have probably lost me if I had a test drive for either. Sorry, guys. It may have been FWD with a solid axle rear, but it looked better and outperformed the SE in terms of power, and from what I know of the chassis, it actually could probably hold its own against a bone stock SE in terms of handling, too.

Daytona Shelby Turbo II began in 1987, and in 89 had a refinement that would make it beat an RX-7 FC Turbo II for me, too, because the back seats were actually USEABLE and the car could be worked on at just about any shop.

Anyways I've made my point about the SE. It's a great car.

SEVSIX all the way.

hard for me to say really....i've always liked the Z31's they to me are just the embodiment of the 1980's but the S12 is just cooler some how to me but sadly if i had the chance to get a F31....i'd go with that

If we're going back to the 80s, is the S12 really worth it? I mean, I've been told the S12 was generally overpriced, with the SE being even more so. I read somewhere the Z31T and S12SE were only a few grand apart, but the Z offered more equipment and performance for the money. For that matter, in all honesty, the MkII Z31 looks better than the MkII S12, and it has those T-tops that people were swooning over in the 80s. If we were buying brand new here, I'd probably go with the Z31.
(Though if I'm honest, if we were buying a brand-new sporty car in 1987, I'd probably buy a Merkur XR4Ti. Same price range, but a niftier car)

And today, the Z31 is cheaper, more plentiful, has a bigger aftermarket, and is a bit easier to work with than the S12 SE. I lean, again, to the Z.

sam31183 on 10:38:05 PM / 27-Mar-13I think this thread is kind of dumb.....

Nissan today has two cars on the same drivetrain: the 370Z and G37. The G is bigger, heavier, and worse. But not because it's bigger and heavier. Rather because they're both second-rate cars, and the G just doesn't have the same following. Actually, much the same can be said of SE vs Z31. The SE is worse, but not because it was made as an afterthought. It just doesn't have the same following.

(As an aside, an example of two different cars sharing a drivetrain, where the bigger one is better, is the Chevy Camaro vs the Holden Commodore/Maloo. I dare you to tell me the sedan/ute isn't better than the 4500lb coupe)

No that's not a fair comparison, because those are badged as Nissan and Infiniti respectively, so there's a level of refinement expected from the G37 that isn't in the Z34.

This isn't the same; the Z31 and the S12 were both badged under the Nissan banner, in an era when the idea of a luxury brand from the same manufacturer was only being hinted at by Honda, and other wise had been a North American manufacturer trick (i.e. Lincoln).

So that said, it would come down to features and price. Honestly, "a few grand" was a lot of money back then, and would indeed be the deciding factor for most people. Sure, there were a few more bells and whistles in the Z31, but for those drivers who wanted the "driving experience" of a performance vehicle, finding out the S12 had the same engine but a more spartan interior (but still with power windows) might have been appealing. And frankly, I think the SE did indeed look better than the Mark II Z31. But that last part is opinion. However, it's true that by the late 80's, the "T-tops" craze was mostly over. It started in the 70's and had run it's course, and the new power sunroof was king, while the tilt-up was almost as popular. The "targa" approach to removing a tilt-up was the new thing.

I think the S12 probably didn't sell as well as the Z31 mostly due to the Z badge's legacy and the attention the turbo model Z received, but a shrewd buyer would ask enough questions about the SE and the NA Z31 to find out the SE was the better deal unless you had to have the turbo.

And obviously there were shrewd buyers or people who simply just fell in love with the car's looks, because there are still a healthy number of SE's on the road. Considering that they didn't represent the bulk of production for Mark II S12's, that's saying something significant... kinda backs my opinion up.

It could just be there are more SEs on the road because the XE's pitiful CA20 wasn't worth keeping around, and they sold even fewer Turbos than SEs in the states. I mean, if you weren't an S12 fan, would you try and keep a CA20 running, or would you just sell it to someone to use as a beater, and get something better? Conversely, the VG30 is a much better motor, and inspiring enough to want to keep going.

The reason the S12 didn't sell as well falls to a few reasons: The S12 was overpriced for its level of performance, the Z31 was priced cheaper than other cars in its niche, the Z had pedigree, and the Z was better equipped. You said it in another thread: by the time the S12 came into its own, the crowd that was buying that kind of car had moved on to other things. People who wanted a RWD sporty Nissan would have much rather had the Z31, and I posit those who bought otherwise were enticed to the S12 because it was a bit cheaper and the rear seats weren't completely useless. Thus the S12 sold much more poorly than the Z31. The proof is in the sales numbers.

Actually, I argue, of the two, the Z is the better car. The S12, especially the SE, is cobbled together from parts of other cars. The suspension is a re-jiggered Z31 unit, the engine in the XE came from the Stanza and the one from the SE came from the Z, the transmission is an across-the-line RWD, and the list goes on. Just enough is S12-exclusive to make it inconvenient. The Z, on the other hand, was designed from the outset to be what it was, and that shows. The Z, with its available turbocharged V6, is faster and I daresay nimbler, with its heartier brakes, adjustable-dampening suspension, and better aerodynamics. And so it's no wonder it sold so well. People will give me flak for this, but the Z31 is the superior car. It just had a lot more money thrown into it, and a much more solid idea about what Nissan wanted from it.

(Also, the G37/370Z debate- Skyline Coupe 370 vs Fairlady 370Z. Both are Nissans, both sold to the same country as Nissans, and the Skyline is worse than the Z. For the first time ever. (Unless the 350s count. Even then.))