Prelude SI compared to 300zx N/A

Today (saturday), I test drove a 1993 Nissan 300zx N/A 2 seater. While making some comparisons with the 1992 prelude SI 4ws that I drive, I urge you to keep a few things in mind: The 300zx has 65,000 miles on it, while my prelude is just 150 shy of 200k. The Z obviously has more power, 222 bhp compared to the prelude's 160 bhp, and 198 ft/lbs of torque compared to the prelude's 156 ft/lbs. The Z weighs a bit more at 3219 lbs compared to the prelude's curb weight of 2866 lbs.

If you want more stats, you can look here and here:
http://datsunzclub.net/gpage.html.html
http://www.webcom.com/wv/prelude/95specs/si.html

Upon first getting in the vehicle, I noticed the ignition switch in the Z was a little harder to locate than in the prelude for the first time. This could be that I am used to hondas, but the Z' ignition switch is in kind of a weird position anyway. Trying to take the key out took some getting used to as well, for it has a button that you must push while turning, instead of Honda's nice little push the key in and turn system.

I def. like the turnability in the prelude better than the Z. While backing out, I had to do a 3 point turn sort of thing. Never would happen in my 4WS prelude :smile:. Unless of course the damn 4WS cuts out, like it does sometimes :mad: .

The interior in the Z was soft, supportive, and really comfortable. The ebrake was out of the way, and the switches were nicely placed all around you. You feel more like you are in a cockpit than you do in the prelude. Everything surrounds you similar to a down comforter in the midst of winter after a long day of snowboarding. Nothing is out of reach in other cars, but with the Z, it's an enveloped feeling. You are more one with the car. Electric seats are a big plus as well. The only thing I didn't really like about it was that you sit higher in the Z, but I got used to it. The quality of the Z's interior seemed a little better than the prelude. Overall, I like the Z's cockpit much better.

The visibility in the Z left something to be desired as well. I'm used to the nice panoramic windsheilds that Honda likes to incorporate into most of their cars. I bet you take your visibility for granted in your Honda.. I know I did. Then there is the notorious Z blindspot. Whatever rumor has been spread about it is true. It's terrible, but nothing you couldn't get used to with a little neck yoga. Rear window visibility wasn't as good as the prelude either. Overall, the prelude was better in the visibility department.

Now for the power. Driving the N/A Z was a little bitter sweet. On one hand, I expected a huge amount more power over my prelude. On the other, I expected to be disappointed as it only has 222hp. The Z has a better sensation of torque compared to the prelude, but suprisingly, this was only felt past 2000 RPM. The Z also has longer gears. You could cruise comfortably at 70 in fourth gear. Makes me wonder what the potential of top gear is? In the onramp test, Z wins hands down. Cycling through gears 1-3 was a breeze, but there was a little grind going into 4th. This is a common problem with 300zxs as their 4th gear synchros are somewhat weak. Nothing that can't be solved with a bit of heavier oil though. Until I drive my future prelude VTEC, I am undecided on which I will like better. My guess is the Z though, because I like the torque sensation.

My favorite part: the suspension. The Z was stock, but had better tires and is RWD. My prelude, however, is lowered on dual chamber gas shocks, has stiffer springs, and upper tie bars on both front and rear. I didn't get a chance to corner much in the Z, but there was a corner that I took a little fast and the Zs cornering was strong. The car really felt stable and controlled. On the drive home, however, I took a couple pretty sharp onramps in my lude, and decided that it was better than the Z. My prelude also gives me more of an agile go-kart feeling, which I like.

One thing I had to get used to in the Z was the closeness of the pedals. The brake and the gas are really close together (similar to that of a Jaguar XK-E :smile:). I didn't feel comfortable heel-toe shifting right away.. as least not as comfortable as I am doing it in my lude. The pedals were also a bit softer. The clutch didn't take as much effort to push in as the lude does. I think this made for quicker shifts overall. The gas pedal also had a different feeling. Again, nothing that you can't be acclimated to. The shift knob in the Z also looks a bit long, but is suprisingly comfortable and ergonomic. Moreso than the prelude.

After all of this, I like the Z much better overall. It's more powerful, more comfortable, and just feels of more quality. It should, however, having a substantially higher base price than the lude, and being almost 135 thousand miles & 1 year newer. The lude has it's strong suits though. I am still thinking, but have come to the conclusion that buying the Z would be a finanacial burden right now, and I would really like to see how the VTEC prelude performs comparitively. In the long run, I will probably just save up for a TT Z.

All comments and other feedback are appreciated. Thanks for reading my comparison.

*disclaimer: I have been a fan of the Z since I was 13-14 years old. I tried to make the comparison the least biased that I could. I did not include exterior looks of both cars because different people have different tastes.

As much as i love 300zx's... If it's possible for you I would take your 4ws prelude and drop the ol h22 in there. Or make an H23-H22 hybrid... I know it's alittle off the subject of the thread but I just want to make sure you don't give up on the potential of your lude!

I think a TT 300 ZX with its 300 hp would compensate for the increased 500lbs of weight. A TT Z will also be just as rare if not more than a VTEC prelude, but forget about the gas mileage you're going to get.

I know what you are saying 94.. and I'm going to do the swap this summer. I know the prelude has potential, but the Z just has about 10xs more, and that's why I'm going to get one in the long run. For the next year or so anyway, I'll keep tearing apart and rebuilding my lude. :smile:

BTW: you were right on topic.

The thing I dont like about teh 300zx is that its only a 2 seater unless you get the 2+2 which tha handling feels like your driving some low suspended lincoln, I just love having some passengers in the back even thought its a tight space you can still fit in some 100 pound women if you know what i mean :naughty:

THE Z are just great i love the look , wit body kit or with out . i wish i could trade someone my prelude for 2+2 Z . my 92 lude back seats are cramp , the z is more space on the back ...
Z cost too much if broke down , a fan cost 300+
Prelude 120 . still i would get Z ... great power and good for driving rains , i feel like a looser when come to rains... suck . man those Z people driving next to Covertte and i'm behind ... darn it

i'm also in the process of deciding if my next car should be Z or another prelude. After test driving a N/A Z im really fixed on getting one, their so fun! and the rwd is cool, im so use the the fwd of honda's. Only thing holding me back is that i cant find one that i like or thats in my range. The question of reliabilty also comes to mind. i need a good daily driver and since im going to be trading one car off for another im really worried that if i do get a Z im going to run into many problems down the road and not have a car to drive for a month. Z's are really fun but honda's are so damn reliable.

also, how tuneable are Z's?

I had a third generation (84-89) 300zx Turbo back in the day. I miss the targa top and cruising around town with the panels off. Suprisingly it does not feel any torquer than my Prelude right now, until you really romp on the gas. I miss that 'mmmmmmm pssstt' sound. It felt a bit faster than an H23A.

My new H22A is now faster, but... Z's are still very nice cars. In the future I want to find a 240Z.

Yeah i test drove a 94 n/a 300zx and the t-top was fawking sweet. Me and my friend had it out for 2 hours and the guy thought we stole it... We didn't know anybetter! But it was a 2+2 and it felt just right. Not to big or anything.

as I said the 2+2 is a bit longer and just doesnt look that good, unless you add one of those bigger body kits like one of my fav the west wing ones look awsome on the 2+2 and true the 2+2's have more space on the back seat. The problem is the price and the problems ill get in the future, especially with the twin turbo.... I just cant wait until I get my prelude VTEC....

the JDM bumper for the z looks really good to, not to crazy looking

Before i bought my 95 prelude vtec i tested both the N/A 300zx and the 300zxTT. I was very impressed by the 2 seater twin turbo and would have given my left arm to buy it but due to my age at the time i couldnt get financed and insurance would have been ridiculously high. So that was out, then i went to look at the N/A 300zx. I agree that it felt tighter in the turns then my prelude when it was stock and the rwd definately gives you more feeling of torque. But with some suspension work and i/h/e my prelude could hold its own against the 300zx. One thing i would bring to consideration is the year of the car. Since it went out of production in 93 your looking at cars that are all over 10 years old. The cheap ones will have high mileage and need a lot of work or they're overpriced but well maintained. I personally wouldnt buy a 300zx if it wasnt a turbo. You can take your prelude si, put a vtec head on it, get more performance, and pay cheaper insurance. If i had to make the decision over again i would still go with my prelude.

Before i bought my 95 prelude vtec i tested both the N/A 300zx and the 300zxTT. I was very impressed by the 2 seater twin turbo and would have given my left arm to buy it but due to my age at the time i couldnt get financed and insurance would have been ridiculously high. So that was out, then i went to look at the N/A 300zx. I agree that it felt tighter in the turns then my prelude when it was stock and the rwd definately gives you more feeling of torque. But with some suspension work and i/h/e my prelude could hold its own against the 300zx. One thing i would bring to consideration is the year of the car. Since it went out of production in 93 your looking at cars that are all over 10 years old. The cheap ones will have high mileage and need a lot of work or they're overpriced but well maintained. I personally wouldnt buy a 300zx if it wasnt a turbo. You can take your prelude si, put a vtec head on it, get more performance, and pay cheaper insurance. If i had to make the decision over again i would still go with my prelude.

The Z went out of production in the US in 1996, same as the 4th gen prelude. It did, however, stay in production in Japan until 2001, similar to the 5th gen prelude. The Z has a much bigger aftermarket than the prelude, including the plethora of suspension parts available. It is also pretty hard to find a prelude with low miles in good condition. It has been my observation that preludes are also driven much harder, and usually more beat up than Zs.

my bad on the year... and your right, both cars have an aftermarket available, my logic however is why buy a N/A car and pump all sorts of money into it if its not going to have the performance of a stock TT? And as far as the cars quality and availibilty, that would depend entirely on what region of the country your in and when your looking for them. All in all its your decision and I think the 300 is respectable choice and if it makes you happy go for it.

It is also pretty hard to find a prelude with low miles in good condition. It has been my observation that preludes are also driven much harder, and usually more beat up than Zs.

Where you from? its the exact opposite in SoCal. Out of the 7 respectable preludes i've found for sale only 2 Z's have met my standard's, regardless of price

Where you from? its the exact opposite in SoCal. Out of the 7 respectable preludes i've found for sale only 2 Z's have met my standard's, regardless of price

Out of how many that you have looked at? I find the Zs are a bit more rare than the prelude as well, and that could be why I see more preludes that are beat to shit. I haven't been looking at people's cars for sale either, just what people are already driving.

i've looked at about 8z's and around 10 ludes for sale.

Thought you where talking about cars for sale, in that case I would agree with you ive seen more beat ludes then 300zx's

I have an H22 and I just rode in my friends 300 N\A 2 seater. I have to say the ZX has a little more pull at the low end but once you get them up there and Vtec kicks in it's anyone's game. It even felt like I had just a little bit more at the very top but that could just be the condition of the cars (mine is newer).

my school almost every asian kids who drive a prelude including myself. The Z is rare , my friend got a 94 300zx 2+2 he is so crazy driving that Z . He got like 4 or 5 tickets and finally the car was totaled. insurance pay him 13 k for that Z, now he end up with 2004 accord V6 2dr , HE told me it was less power then the Z . accord 240 Hp fwd,Z 222 HP rwd , it seem the z got less power. somehow he say the Z got more power. Prelude VTEC Type S or integra Type R i think is no where near the Z , Over atlanta the Z got more respect like a supra or 3000gt.

my school almost every asian kids who drive a prelude including myself. The Z is rare , my friend got a 94 300zx 2+2 he is so crazy driving that Z . He got like 4 or 5 tickets and finally the car was totaled. insurance pay him 13 k for that Z, now he end up with 2004 accord V6 2dr , HE told me it was less power then the Z . accord 240 Hp fwd,Z 222 HP rwd , it seem the z got less power. somehow he say the Z got more power. Prelude VTEC Type S or integra Type R i think is no where near the Z , Over atlanta the Z got more respect like a supra or 3000gt.

one question off-topic. your asian right?