I loved how Nissan and Toyota used to make twin cars: from pickup trucks to S12+AE86 RWD twins. Maxima vs Avalon, Camry vs Altima vs Accord. Corolla vs Sentra vs Civic. Nowadays it seems like Infiniti follows Acura.
Years ago I took my 1984 ford telstar 2.0 carb in quartermile was a fast car at the time had extractors and exhaust recon motor but did 16.1 quartermile lol 😆 at 140kph
I’m thinking maybe there was something wrong with their test car or perhaps the driver didn’t know how to launch it 🤷🏻♂️ those numbers to a car that size with that much power don’t really add up to me
Yeah there had to be something wrong with this car or their tests. I remember when this car came out and it was faster to sixty than the 300zx na. It wasn’t by much, but it weighed less than the 300 so it made since.
GT6SuzukaTimeTrials And abysmal acceleration numbers. For a car that weighed about 2500 lbs, 160HP should make that thing scoot, but it hardly can get out of its own way.
joh n actually , the car's weight come in at 2975lbs based off everything that can be found online for the v6 version. motorweek must have mistakenly referenced the 4 banger car's weight.
The older I get the more I realize these guys were reaching for both positive and negative things to say. There was nothing wrong with this car, the subjective things should be left alone. I happen to love the interior design, as did all those who bought these cars.
It wouldnt be 190hp tho, it only is so because japanese always use appropriate high octane fuel. It would have to be detuned for shitty 87 octane fuel as people only ever want cheapest pump gas. It would be probably around 150 maybe 160-ish at best. It shows with how toyota gave up on trying with 3sge just 2 years later and just slapped lazy 5sfe from camry into both Celica and MR2 except for turbo version.
I think that building a sick VG based from a 3.3 block would suit it better, or perhaps a VQ swap. IMO do the sr into a base model or a 1986-back turbo s12. These were pretty unique in thier class and it would be a shame to remove what made it special. Im surprised at the z28 comparison, nah in my mind this was Nissans take on a Foxbody Mustang 5.0 It even looks like a cross between an AE86 and a Mustang, particularly the Interior! And to end, that crazy Japanese fabric design is one of the things about 80s Nissans that I love!
My dad had an 1984 200SX hatchback with the 2L CA20E. I learned to drive in that car and drove it in high school. My friend, who had a Honda Prelude 4WS, and I would race each other and that 200SX never lost a race. We had it until 1990 when an idiot ran a stop sign going 3x the posted limit hit the car and bent it almost 90 degrees. I loved that car and made me a car guy.
Get a base model to swap, they already had a CA20 in them and that way you can preserve the uniqueness of the V6 model (only made for 2 years!) I dont think it was very common, I've only seen 2 or 3 SEv6 models my whole life (but seen lots of 4cyl ones) If i find one that is actually intact ill probably build a mean VG33 based lump for it.
Miss my 1st car, a brand new 1985 Nissan 200SX, Manual Trans, 2 door Sedan. The best car I ever had. Put 280K miles on it without any problem except replace of Clutch once until it did not pass the emission inspection that needs a new catalytic that cost $500 and timing belt $1000. Sold for $1,000 in 1998, not bad for car with 280K miles on it. What hurts the most is the car is in good shape because the buyer owner is a friend (car guy) I saw often as he live just 20 mikes away...
At least the s12 came with a higher performance version in the us which we should've gotten in the S 13 but then again Nissan was starting to lose its way by the time the S 13 came out. And now absolutely cannot disagree with you more. The styling of the S12 is unequivocably 1980s and I love it for that. I am sure you meant the handling of the S 13 made the S 12 HANDLE like a 1970s car but absolutely no way an S 12 ever look it came from the 1970s. If anything pretty much a third GEN Camaro is what set the styling trend for the 1980s which the 200sx, ae86 , and even Mustang all followed suit. in fact, I would dare to say that the Mustang might've actually started the said styling trim trend being that it came out in 1979
@@muhdewd9727 not true... there bottom end needs to be upgraded to be reliably over 300whp. SR’s bottoms can handle more than 500whp and they’re timing chain as well (without the notorious rattle that the KA is known for)
Yeah, that was just a 2 door Sentra in 1996 and unless you got the SE your 200sx was only packing a 1.6 Its really a shame how Nissan totaly lost thier way in the mid 1990s, it really is sad. Nissan used to be the performance and sport oriented japanese company, hard to believe looking at Todays Nissan, basically became Yesterdays Toyota but without the quality
+Doobie1975 The number of people here expecting 5 second 0-60 times here is hilarious. The most POWERFUL of Ferrari's back then did that. So 10 seconds was fast at the time. You're normal road car did much closer to 20.
+Doobie1975 LOL, that's probably what more expensive performance cars did at the time. Even recently 0-60 runs were quite high. When the GTR came out, it was the only production car that was able to do a sub 3s 0-60 run. Most supercars were doing 3 or 4 seconds at that time.
1) The s12 V6 was not a "lightweight sports car" , at 2956lb it was more like a Japanese Foxbody Mustang 2) Car and Driver's published road test pegged 0-60 in 8.6s which was decent for its day, MT must've gotten a Friday car 3) most cars werent much faster than that in 1987, notable exceptions are the Buick GNX (4.7s 0-60) and Porsche 959 (3.9s 0-60) but for comparison that aforementioned 5.0 stang did 0-60 in 6.3s so 8.6s for a v6 of 160hp in a car not much lighter was decent.
Funny...in Europe this one was actually called the Sylvia. Only the very last 200sx had the same typename. We never got the 3ltr engine here, only the 300zx. Megarare these days...😆
Wow, back in the day, they actually rated engine service accessibility. Today, manufacturers would probably void your warranty just for changing a headlight bulb.
0-60 in 10.0 seconds is abysmal for a lightweight, RWD coupe with a 160 hp 3.0L V6 and manual transmission. I would expect a time like that if it had a 1.8L I-4 with 110 hp. An E30 325is with a 168 hp 2.5L I-6 did 0-60 in 7.4 seconds.
I don't think the car tester was good at driving manual. I got 7.2 sec 0-60 and 15.5 1/4 at 88 mph stock. They're not pushing it to the limit along with poor launch.
I drove 1 back while I was in college. The shifter was crap. Bulky, notchy, and it would often 'get lost' between gears on a quick upshift. A better shifter and linkage was needed to make that a great lil car!
The thing with that car is that one would have to get use to driving it along with the shifter. Yes, it was one of the worse ever with very long throws but once you get use to it, it's fine just like every other car.
Nissan put the VG engine in almost everything they could fit it into back then, kind of like what Nissan did with the VQ from 1995-2015 One interesting tidbit about the Quest/Villager VG30 was it was the only iteration of the VG that was non-interference (by Fords directive) So no wonder the quests were so slow, the cams had to be super mild to allow for an non-interference design!
The 300zx was actually heavier and obviously the performance was too similar Because otherwise the V6 option would've never materialized you would've thought that Nissan would've just continued the turbo four trend right into the S 13 because the V6 was only available in the US market . As far as I know all non-US market, got some version of the CA 18 What would've been a really cool and very collectible would've been if Nissan would've done a one year only 1989 S 12 with the SR 20 DET, with the S 13 model lineup coming in 1990. It is such a shame that Nissan would not sell the SR 20 DET in the US because they didn't want to compete with the much more expensive z car Makes no sense, considering that why would it matter as long as customers bought a Nissan why would it matter which Nissan they bought? Corporate logic really stinks. Perhaps some alternative reality where Nissan didn't end up completely losing themselves it actually happened.
I loved my 1987 Nissan 200SX SE-V6. I bought mine in 1990 and then sold it in 1995 when I got a company car with my job at the time. I should have kept the car.
I had an '88 Blue/Blue. I actually liked it more than the '85 Supra, never should have sold either one. I never liked V6's 'til I had a VG30. Had an '88 Maxima SE too. Still got 3 VG's sitting in the shop, one's a VG30ET.
I can't seem to understand the horrible performance numbers they got with 160hp in a ~2700lb car. My old 95 Honda Accord EX weighed ~2850lb and it had a 2.2l fire breathing 4 banner with VTEC that produced 145hp. For the hell of it I took it to Sacramento raceway for the Wednesday fun drags (bracket racing) and I was able to get the car down to a 16 flat quarter mile. The car was 100% stock, it had nearly bald tires, the clutch needed to be replaced (slipped if a dropped over a certain rpm) and the car had around 160k miles. The 200sx has a 100+ pounds advantage, 15 more hp and 27 more lb-ft of torque but my accord was over 1 second faster in a quarter mile. If only the car had a VG30DETT option.
Andrew Walters Tire technology, drag strip grippyness (vs. the regular asphalt it looks like they tested the s12 on), better gearing in the Honda, and you're probably a better driver lol
They did have small fuel tanks. I drove both an 87 auto and an 88 5 sp SE from Chicago to CA (at different times) and I averaged 30 mpg in the 88 and 29.5 in the 87. I had the cruise control set at 85 mph most of the way. I think the best distance I managed was 375 miles before I stopped for fuel.
Why was it not called the 300SX? Nissan and other Japanese manufacturers commonly name their cars according to the size of the engine. The 240Z had a 2.4, the 260Z a 2.6, 280Z a 2.8, 300ZX a 3.0, 350Z a 3.5, 370Z a 3.7, the S13/S14 240SX a 2.4, S14 200SX a 2.0, FWD 200SX a 1.6 with 2.0 option, S13 180SX a 1.8 with 2.0 liter engine option. But not this one.
+chipchip That's what my S12 has swapped into it. Makes a huge difference in the performance department. Especially with a bigger turbo and intercooler.
The turbo here in the US was the CA18ET. While it wasn't the best engine, it became the CA18DET, and its cast iron block had two cylinders added with a larger bore to become the famous RB26 used in the Skylines. It also was influential in the development of the SR20 series.
Wait, if we got turbo 200SX’s here why do so many Nissan guys swap their 240’s over? Why don’t they just buy SR equipped cars in the first place? You have to try hard to only get 160bhp from a 3.0L V6 - That’s a terrible design!
My mom's dickhead boyfriend had one of these new back in 87'. I couldn't stand him but the car, have admit was cool. He had the blue version. I dont remember it having the lower skirts.
silkhead44 I think MW tends to not abuse their test cars with full on dumping of the clutch at raised rpm's when making acceleration tests. Off idle starts and full throttle lift shifting is why the numbers are slower than other publications. I think C/D and MT got this car into the mid/high 8s to 60 and mid/high 16s in the 1/4mile.
05gtdriver those magazines use unrealistic launch methods. Motorweek is known for "real world" launches, where they aren't dumping the clutch at high rpms, like other car reviewers do to get the maximum time.
I loved how Nissan and Toyota used to make twin cars: from pickup trucks to S12+AE86 RWD twins. Maxima vs Avalon, Camry vs Altima vs Accord. Corolla vs Sentra vs Civic. Nowadays it seems like Infiniti follows Acura.
I love this car
It always reminded me of the AE86 appearance wise.
It’s like a trueno hatch with taillights from a coupe
A few people called them the japanese twins
Corolla Sport Coupe?
It does though.
I have 2, an 87/88 and people always ask me is that a Toyota?
A friend had an 88 V6. We were getting consistent 0-60's in mid to high 7's. I know for sure it was way better than 10
Exactly, I mean seriously, a 17.5 quarter mile? My 93 Probe GT had about the same power and weight, yet get 15.5 in the quarter.
Years ago I took my 1984 ford telstar 2.0 carb in quartermile was a fast car at the time had extractors and exhaust recon motor but did 16.1 quartermile lol 😆 at 140kph
The Turbo 2.0 200sx 0 to 60 is around 7.5 seconds. Not sure how they got 10 seconds.
I’m thinking maybe there was something wrong with their test car or perhaps the driver didn’t know how to launch it 🤷🏻♂️ those numbers to a car that size with that much power don’t really add up to me
Yeah there had to be something wrong with this car or their tests. I remember when this car came out and it was faster to sixty than the 300zx na. It wasn’t by much, but it weighed less than the 300 so it made since.
I miss my '88 200SX Turbo. I owned it for 18 years. Great car!
Very beautiful and great car this Nissan 200 SX 87, I love this car
I saw a 1984-88 Nissan 200SX liftback parked on the side of the road last weekend and the car appears to be in really good shape.
3.0L V6 with just 160 hp 174 ft-lbs...Oh the 80's...
Yup the era of big engines with no power lol...funny that midsize family sedans nowadays beat those figures with 4 bangers under the bonnet lol
PremierAutoMan86 Oh retrospect!!!
GT6SuzukaTimeTrials And abysmal acceleration numbers. For a car that weighed about 2500 lbs, 160HP should make that thing scoot, but it hardly can get out of its own way.
HINDSIGHTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT if only you culda invented a better engine..then go BACK IN TIME TO MAKE IT WORK!!!! IF ONLY!!! llololololoolololol
joh n actually , the car's weight come in at 2975lbs based off everything that can be found online for the v6 version. motorweek must have mistakenly referenced the 4 banger car's weight.
The older I get the more I realize these guys were reaching for both positive and negative things to say. There was nothing wrong with this car, the subjective things should be left alone. I happen to love the interior design, as did all those who bought these cars.
I love the Retro reviews...Thank you Wotorweek!!!
It is a pity the superb 200SX never gotten the FJ20ET for the US market; 190hp in a 2.0 liter 4cyl would have been amazing power density for its day.
Wouldn't pass smog here like the sr20det
The V6 is better
And 250 hp was eazy got get out of it
It wouldnt be 190hp tho, it only is so because japanese always use appropriate high octane fuel. It would have to be detuned for shitty 87 octane fuel as people only ever want cheapest pump gas. It would be probably around 150 maybe 160-ish at best. It shows with how toyota gave up on trying with 3sge just 2 years later and just slapped lazy 5sfe from camry into both Celica and MR2 except for turbo version.
My dad owned a 1984 Nissan 200SX Turbo. Its looks were ahead of its time. It had a digital dash and every kid at my school loved it.
Love this car. Very underrated and overlooked. Stick a CA or SR in one of these and BAM!
I think that building a sick VG based from a 3.3 block would suit it better, or perhaps a VQ swap. IMO do the sr into a base model or a 1986-back turbo s12.
These were pretty unique in thier class and it would be a shame to remove what made it special.
Im surprised at the z28 comparison, nah in my mind this was Nissans take on a Foxbody Mustang 5.0
It even looks like a cross between an AE86 and a Mustang, particularly the Interior!
And to end, that crazy Japanese fabric design is one of the things about 80s Nissans that I love!
The insane high pitched sound in the background painfully reminds me of how old this review is lol
One of the best v6 engines of the era. Way better than toyota v6s of the day.
V630?? I think he means VG30. This car was surprisingly slow for what it was
Underpantsniper And actually VG30E. Too bad they didn't use VG30ET, that has torque.
When did the vq series start?
@@maxwelsh6121 I think it was in 99 or 2000 in the Maxima.
Yeah, but it felt like a fast car though with its free revving engine. It was pretty easy to break those rear tires loose too.
Craig Wildfeuer actually believe it or not the first vq engine was in 1994 with the vq20de wasn’t a well known engine at the time though
My dad had an 1984 200SX hatchback with the 2L CA20E. I learned to drive in that car and drove it in high school. My friend, who had a Honda Prelude 4WS, and I would race each other and that 200SX never lost a race. We had it until 1990 when an idiot ran a stop sign going 3x the posted limit hit the car and bent it almost 90 degrees. I loved that car and made me a car guy.
Too bad Nissan is not like that anymore
I used to watch this show back in the early and mid 80s. I always loved it when they showed sports cars.
I love the pic of the car in the dead grass at 0:29
Japanese looks is the best choice!!
Thats way I used to have one back in the day!!
That's right. That's right! I'm looking to buy a 1987 Nissan 200sx. Sweet car! Looking for a Merkur XR4Ti too
I love the styling, it would be grand to drop a SR20det in one of these.
Get a base model to swap, they already had a CA20 in them and that way you can preserve the uniqueness of the V6 model (only made for 2 years!) I dont think it was very common, I've only seen 2 or 3 SEv6 models my whole life (but seen lots of 4cyl ones)
If i find one that is actually intact ill probably build a mean VG33 based lump for it.
Miss my 1st car, a brand new 1985 Nissan 200SX, Manual Trans, 2 door Sedan. The best car I ever had. Put 280K miles on it without any problem except replace of Clutch once until it did not pass the emission inspection that needs a new catalytic that cost $500 and timing belt $1000. Sold for $1,000 in 1998, not bad for car with 280K miles on it. What hurts the most is the car is in good shape because the buyer owner is a friend (car guy) I saw often as he live just 20 mikes away...
Damn... I had this back in high school. Loved it. If I find one around, I would definitely buy it.
same here
beautiful car, thanks for uploading =)
And then two years later the S13 fastback came out and made this thing look like it came from the seventies.
At least the s12 came with a higher performance version in the us which we should've gotten in the S 13 but then again Nissan was starting to lose its way by the time the S 13 came out.
And now absolutely cannot disagree with you more. The styling of the S12 is unequivocably 1980s and I love it for that. I am sure you meant the handling of the S 13 made the S 12 HANDLE like a 1970s car but absolutely no way an S 12 ever look it came from the 1970s.
If anything pretty much a third GEN Camaro is what set the styling trend for the 1980s which the 200sx, ae86 , and even Mustang all followed suit. in fact, I would dare to say that the Mustang might've actually started the said styling trim trend being that it came out in 1979
Head lights go up, head lights go down, up down up down up down up down
Yeah I got the RCR reference!
I love pop up headlights....
shame on u nissan, selling the 180SX in the US with the sissy KA24 instead of the badass SR20 or at least CA18....
KA24 was a great motor. Timing chain, stout bottom end.. took well to turbos.
@@muhdewd9727 not true... there bottom end needs to be upgraded to be reliably over 300whp. SR’s bottoms can handle more than 500whp and they’re timing chain as well (without the notorious rattle that the KA is known for)
I had a 96 200SX. It sure wasn't anything like this!
Yeah, that was just a 2 door Sentra in 1996 and unless you got the SE your 200sx was only packing a 1.6
Its really a shame how Nissan totaly lost thier way in the mid 1990s, it really is sad. Nissan used to be the performance and sport oriented japanese company, hard to believe looking at Todays Nissan, basically became Yesterdays Toyota but without the quality
Wow I was expecting this car to be a lot faster than the actual times considering it's a lightweight sports car
+Doobie1975 The number of people here expecting 5 second 0-60 times here is hilarious. The most POWERFUL of Ferrari's back then did that. So 10 seconds was fast at the time. You're normal road car did much closer to 20.
I was expecting it to be in the low to mid 8's in the 0-60 run
+Doobie1975 LOL, that's probably what more expensive performance cars did at the time. Even recently 0-60 runs were quite high. When the GTR came out, it was the only production car that was able to do a sub 3s 0-60 run. Most supercars were doing 3 or 4 seconds at that time.
1) The s12 V6 was not a "lightweight sports car" , at 2956lb it was more like a Japanese Foxbody Mustang
2) Car and Driver's published road test pegged 0-60 in 8.6s which was decent for its day, MT must've gotten a Friday car
3) most cars werent much faster than that in 1987, notable exceptions are the Buick GNX (4.7s 0-60) and Porsche 959 (3.9s 0-60) but for comparison that aforementioned 5.0 stang did 0-60 in 6.3s so 8.6s for a v6 of 160hp in a car not much lighter was decent.
Still have my ‘87 SE V6. In great shape other than when my son rear ended someone. It tore me up
I had this one like 15 years ago. Same engine, color, and everything.
me too
It's actually called the VG30;not V630. Not sure if I liked it more than the old
turbo though....
You can find them here in Florida 👍
I have a hard time picking between a 200SX, Celica, Eclipse, Integra or Prelude from era
Since when is a notchy shifter a bad thing?...id rather have that than a mushbox that most older cars had
This was my first car. Loved it.
Ahhhh...when Nissan used to make exciting car's!
GREAT CAR.
This should have been takumi's biggest rivals car lol
My first car was a 200sx and when this came out I really wanted one. Not sure how many they made but they are virtually non existent.
All it needs is a Turbo bolted onto it’s V6.
Funny...in Europe this one was actually called the Sylvia. Only the very last 200sx had the same typename. We never got the 3ltr engine here, only the 300zx. Megarare these days...😆
Wow, back in the day, they actually rated engine service accessibility. Today, manufacturers would probably void your warranty just for changing a headlight bulb.
I SEE THAT 928 S4!! better post that review soon!!
Where have all the sport coupes gone? They need to come back pronto.
0-60 in 10.0 seconds is abysmal for a lightweight, RWD coupe with a 160 hp 3.0L V6 and manual transmission. I would expect a time like that if it had a 1.8L I-4 with 110 hp. An E30 325is with a 168 hp 2.5L I-6 did 0-60 in 7.4 seconds.
Looks like the AE86
I love how even a nissan review calls it tossing a s12 in a corner 🤣🤣🤣
I always though that the S12 was far better than the 86
I love this car NISSAN 200sx
I don't think the car tester was good at driving manual. I got 7.2 sec 0-60 and 15.5 1/4 at 88 mph stock. They're not pushing it to the limit along with poor launch.
I drove 1 back while I was in college. The shifter was crap. Bulky, notchy, and it would often 'get lost' between gears on a quick upshift. A better shifter and linkage was needed to make that a great lil car!
The thing with that car is that one would have to get use to driving it along with the shifter. Yes, it was one of the worse ever with very long throws but once you get use to it, it's fine just like every other car.
Jason M yea. Mid 7 sec is what it felt like. Definitely not 10sec
Its pathetic that an automotive news show refers to the engine as the "V630", when it is actually the "VG30"
Fun fact, they put this motor in the mid 90s Nissan Quests/Mercury villagers albiet mounted sideways. Slow as all heck but sounded mean.
Nissan put the VG engine in almost everything they could fit it into back then, kind of like what Nissan did with the VQ from 1995-2015
One interesting tidbit about the Quest/Villager VG30 was it was the only iteration of the VG that was non-interference (by Fords directive)
So no wonder the quests were so slow, the cams had to be super mild to allow for an non-interference design!
The rear axle ratio must have been horrible for it to accelerate that slow. Probably for better fuel economy.
You would figure it would have similar performance to the 300zx. Is it that much heavier? Wow.
Detuned. They didn't want it to be able to compete with the 300ZX.
The 300zx was actually heavier and obviously the performance was too similar
Because otherwise the V6 option would've never materialized you would've thought that Nissan would've just continued the turbo four trend right into the S 13 because the V6 was only available in the US market . As far as I know all non-US market, got some version of the CA 18
What would've been a really cool and very collectible would've been if Nissan would've done a one year only 1989 S 12 with the SR 20 DET, with the S 13 model lineup coming in 1990.
It is such a shame that Nissan would not sell the SR 20 DET in the US because they didn't want to compete with the much more expensive z car
Makes no sense, considering that why would it matter as long as customers bought a Nissan why would it matter which Nissan they bought? Corporate logic really stinks.
Perhaps some alternative reality where Nissan didn't end up completely losing themselves it actually happened.
I loved my 1987 Nissan 200SX SE-V6. I bought mine in 1990 and then sold it in 1995 when I got a company car with my job at the time. I should have kept the car.
I had an '88 Blue/Blue. I actually liked it more than the '85 Supra, never should have sold either one. I never liked V6's 'til I had a VG30. Had an '88 Maxima SE too. Still got 3 VG's sitting in the shop, one's a VG30ET.
Its not V630 its VG30
I can't seem to understand the horrible performance numbers they got with 160hp in a ~2700lb car. My old 95 Honda Accord EX weighed ~2850lb and it had a 2.2l fire breathing 4 banner with VTEC that produced 145hp. For the hell of it I took it to Sacramento raceway for the Wednesday fun drags (bracket racing) and I was able to get the car down to a 16 flat quarter mile. The car was 100% stock, it had nearly bald tires, the clutch needed to be replaced (slipped if a dropped over a certain rpm) and the car had around 160k miles. The 200sx has a 100+ pounds advantage, 15 more hp and 27 more lb-ft of torque but my accord was over 1 second faster in a quarter mile. If only the car had a VG30DETT option.
Andrew Walters Tire technology, drag strip grippyness (vs. the regular asphalt it looks like they tested the s12 on), better gearing in the Honda, and you're probably a better driver lol
Power is meh, but it gets pretty good gas mileage. I would have been interested back in those days.
I had a automatic se. It handled excellent but was sick dog slow. And it only got 200 miles out of a tank of gas.
They did have small fuel tanks. I drove both an 87 auto and an 88 5 sp SE from Chicago to CA (at different times) and I averaged 30 mpg in the 88 and 29.5 in the 87. I had the cruise control set at 85 mph most of the way. I think the best distance I managed was 375 miles before I stopped for fuel.
Randy Behrmann what kind of rpms was it at going 85mph
Not talking about Turbo's..... Today even non turbo 2.5L 4 bangers have minimum 160-170bhp.
Slower
Thirstier
More expensive
than the Turbo 4.
What's the point of this car?
It should've been properly rebadged as the 300SX since it's running the same V6 engine as the 300ZX of this time.
Considering that the original car had a 1.8l engine, I assume that the number doesn't represent the displacement.
Why is that Duong Demuro even popular when Motorweek is available
Here's a MotorWeek Retro Review of the Nissan 200SX from 1987.
10 second 0-60. Yikes! 😂. Those were the days..
Why was it not called the 300SX? Nissan and other Japanese manufacturers commonly name their cars according to the size of the engine. The 240Z had a 2.4, the 260Z a 2.6, 280Z a 2.8, 300ZX a 3.0, 350Z a 3.5, 370Z a 3.7, the S13/S14 240SX a 2.4, S14 200SX a 2.0, FWD 200SX a 1.6 with 2.0 option, S13 180SX a 1.8 with 2.0 liter engine option. But not this one.
What a car.
Shame they never got them in america with the FJ20ET motor. That was the one to have.
+chipchip That's what my S12 has swapped into it. Makes a huge difference in the performance department. Especially with a bigger turbo and intercooler.
The turbo here in the US was the CA18ET. While it wasn't the best engine, it became the CA18DET, and its cast iron block had two cylinders added with a larger bore to become the famous RB26 used in the Skylines. It also was influential in the development of the SR20 series.
CA18et is so rare in the states now
Wait, if we got turbo 200SX’s here why do so many Nissan guys swap their 240’s over? Why don’t they just buy SR equipped cars in the first place?
You have to try hard to only get 160bhp from a 3.0L V6 - That’s a terrible design!
This was the late 80's. The Nissan 300ZX turbo at 205 bhp was the most powerful engine out of Japan. Technology.
" I will see you next time. "
My friend Deron's mom in 87 had one of these😎😎😎💗😎
I do like these.
0-60 in ten seconds. That's what my 2006 Nissan Sentra does it in.
+Christopher Walker Back then, your sentra would have done 18 seconds. Times change.
I had one of these. Cool car but not after an 83 mustang gt
Nissan should have attached a small quick spooling turbocharger and it could have blown away a bunch of cars!
Wouldn't fit. The 300 ZX Turbo had one manifold wrap around the rear of the engine, no way it would fit that way. I had an '88 SE, it was a stuff job.
WHY DIDN'T ANYONE TELL ME ABOUT THIS CAR?
It looks like it's going to fall over in the turns.
MotorWeek should do a retro review of the Volkswagen New Beetle! I don't know if there was ever an episode but if there is then definitely post it!
Cole Moore Check out testdrivejunkie dot com
Nobody needs that.
Smoother nose and headliiiiiiine.
POP, POP UP AND DOWN HEADLIGHTS!
Carros japoneses são muito bonito da década de 90
Don't they mean VG30
see you next time...
looks like Ford stole this design for the first probe gt
*VG30
Did I hear 10 seconds 0 to 60? No way, It could do better.
My mom's dickhead boyfriend had one of these new back in 87'. I couldn't stand him but the car, have admit was cool. He had the blue version. I dont remember it having the lower skirts.
Only the Turbo and SE-V6 did.
It looks a lot like the toyota trueno ae86
I test drove one of these in 88'. Got turned down for financing 👎
lol
Wow more power and slower..wtf?
nice car.... but the suspension are poor
A completely unexceptional car.
10 sec v6...wow
No wonder people forgot about this car.
silkhead44 I think MW tends to not abuse their test cars with full on dumping of the clutch at raised rpm's when making acceleration tests. Off idle starts and full throttle lift shifting is why the numbers are slower than other publications. I think C/D and MT got this car into the mid/high 8s to 60 and mid/high 16s in the 1/4mile.
05gtdriver those magazines use unrealistic launch methods. Motorweek is known for "real world" launches, where they aren't dumping the clutch at high rpms, like other car reviewers do to get the maximum time.
10 seconds to 60? My dads 09 manual versa is faster then that lmao
look in my youtube channel my homie has one its so fun n light weight but with a ka24de swapp
Slug!
It was the 80s lol
joseph orozco Yeah, I suppose so..
Nissan used to be cool.
l
A Ford bronco is faster than it lmao!
very ugly car