There is a Z32-series 300ZX somewhere missing its wheels. It’s quite likely they were replaced by less attractive rims, but at least they’re being used on this S12-series 200SX, whose owner probably appreciates them a lot more. They don’t entirely match this car’s blocky lines, but are still appropriate, considering this car shares an engine block mostly identical to the piece found in the car which donated them.
The lowering springs are also a good choice, considering the ground effects and this North American-exclusive V6 model’s additional power. Nissan had used the S-chassis cars in rallying, but with the discontinuation of the 240RS rally car (based on the S11 chassis), the company was left scrambling for a replacement. The upgraded motor for these cars was always a turbo four, and in North American tune, the boosted 1.8 liter CA engine left a lot to be desired. Japanese buyers, not surprisingly, had their pick of much better engines, but as their sales were divided among multiple trim levels, none of which sold 5,000 units annually, there were no cars which Nissan could qualify as homologated specials. So, they fitted a new hood and stuffed the 300ZX’s VG30E into the 200SX, since the minimum number of cars in SE V6 trim could be sold easily in the US.
Whatever the reasoning, it seems like more of these sold than the then-new–and very cool–Celica All-Trac Turbo (GT4), even though the Celica outsold the 200SX overall. It might’ve made more sense for Nissan to simply use the newly CA18DET engine, since the single cam version was already used in the US and since the engine would go on to meet great acclaim in the S13 (that is, everywhere except in the US where the KA truck engine would be used instead).
The decision to use the V6 at least benefitted US customers, but as the Eclipse showed, there was a market for powerful Japanese coupes that Nissan did not exploit. There were a lot of other excellent Nissan engines that American consumers never saw. Did you know, for instance, that the SR20 engine was available in Japan with a turbo, with a variable-lift head and, in the CRV-rivalling X-Trail, a special version which combined both? We didn’t even get a compact crossover until 2008! I’ll never know the reasons for Nissan’s bizarre product planning, but don’t get me started.
You’re right, the soft bevels on the 300ZX wheels do soften the angularity of it’s look somewhat. Can’t say I miss the body kits, spoilers and folding lights that passed as high tech at the time. But as a period piece, I quite like it. On that note, I’d probably prefer the more original angular 200sx wheels on it. To remain true to form.
With their sharp lines, many of these early 80s coupes would have looked econobox-like without the exterior ‘extras’. White seemed to suit many straight edge designs from this era.
+1
A very nice find. These never seemed to gain value like the very similar looking Toyota Corolla GTS.
Yeah, this car looks an awful lot like a JDM Trueno, and that’s a good thing.
I like these and always have. My college job was in a print shop where I did errands sometimes in the owner’s 200SX notchback coupe (relatively new at the time). It was loaded with everything available, including the talking feature and a funny little bell for the other warnings. I had a FWD Sunbird at the time, and although similar in size, the two cars couldn’t have been more different to drive. Of course, the 200SX probably cost 50% more.
I absolutely adore S12s. I had an ’86 200SX XE back in the mid-90s and currently have an ’85 four-cylinder, and would almost be willing to chew off my own foot for an SE.
The SE addressed the weakest part of these cars, namely the boat-anchor CA-block four-cylinders. More than anything else, it was the fours that really allowed these cars to slip against their Celica competitors. The CA20E twin-spark two-liter (as fitted to my car, the other option at the time was the barely better CA18ET 1.8L turbo) suffered more than most from emissions equipment and draconian NVH “fixes” and struggles to make 105bhp. Which is a shame because the engines love to rev. It is commonly known in S12 circles that it is virtually impossible to make more power with the CA20; any conventional fixes — freeing the intake and exhaust, for example — cause the car to lose power, and more importantly torque. Add a bizarrely complicated engine management computer and an intake tract four feet long that must remain in place (!) and you get frustrated owners who swap in different engines at the drop of a hat.
I, however, am stubborn and am going a different route. For my build I am ditching the entire fuel-injection/engine management system and going back to carbs. If that doesn’t work, it’s getting a V8.
Putting a carb on a CA20E sounds like a whole lot of headache. If the factory ECM isn’t delivering the fuel/spark you’re looking for, it would probably be simpler and more rewarding to switch to some kind of aftermarket EFI setup. I also had an ’86 200SX (an E model hatch) and it was a ridiculously great car, but the engine was definitely a weak point. I did a little research on modifying it and came to the same conclusion as you – it’s pretty much a dead end. Always figured that if I was going to do something like that, I’d be much better served building a CA20E-CA18ET hybrid. It didn’t seem that difficult from what I remember, although just swapping something else is probably even easier… which is what most people do.
I’d love to have another one, especially a turbo or V6 model!
It’s not so much just dropping a carb on as changing out the entire intake and exhaust and putting quad single-barrel bike carbs on while I’m at it — I have a buddy who runs a bike breakers. I am also planning on swapping to the CA18DET 16v head and dizzy, as it doesn’t require much work.
Call it a streak of stubbornness on my part. I am going to beat this horse into a pulp, ’cause I hate hearing how something can’t be done. And as I said, I have already done the measuring for a complete Mustang 5.0 engine/drivetrain swap should it come to that.
Rallying is expensive as it is, and I’d like to keep the costs as low as possible. Sticking with the stock engine and solid rear axle is one way to do that.
incidentally, that brings up an interesting point about these cars: they were apparently assembled from Nissan parts bins. Except for the strut length. the front suspension and steering racks are identical to the S130 280ZX; the early cars (like mine) had the R190 solid rear axle as found in the S110 240RS and 720 pickup, and the later cars with independent rear ends share the rear subframe (with a few mods) with the RWD Maxima and Z31 300ZX. Shocks and springs are different but the suspension parts themselves are identical. Makes finding bushing kits a fascinating exercise.
I don’t know a lot about specific Nissan swaps, but how about the FJ20ET? Is it incompatable with the mounts, too expensive, or not worth the effort?
Shit, I take it back… that’s not a headache, that’s a brain aneurysm!
Sounds way cool, but getting all those carbs to cooperate with each other is not something I would want to tackle. How are you planning on getting a twin-cam head? AFAIK, Nissan never sold that engine in the US.
There is a pretty good parts pipeline from Japan to Canada, and I know some people. I’ve dealt with multiple carbs before, so I think I have a pretty good handle on that part.
Ideally I’d swap to a V6 but the SE had a different front subframe to clear the VG30’s oil pan. At that point I might as well just bring an SE up from the States.
While North America only got the CA20E and CA18ET, and only the US got the VG30 V6, the FJ20ET was offered in Japan and Europe in the widebody Grand Prix and coupe All-White packages. Oh, what I wouldn’t give for a Grand Prix 200SX, with the standard Gotti wheels and FJ engine…
Until fuel injection, one carb per cylinder has always been the way motorcycles do it. I’ve never had trouble with multi-carb set ups on bikes or cars, as long as they flow the same and the linkage is linear.
The reasoning behind the VG being used in the 200SX Works rally cars wasn’t due to homologation issues at all, but rather because Nissan had already dabbled with turbocharging in their rally cars, and they weren’t very reliable or competitive.
The first attempt was a works Z18ET powered Bluebird Turbo that was entered alongside a works 16-valve Violet GT for the 1981 Rallye Monte Carlo. The Violet finished 13th, the Bluebird Turbo 54th. During the next two years, the best result a turbo powered Nissan rally product could manage was in the 1982 1000 Lakes Rally, where Timo Salonen brought his Silvia Turbo home in 4th place. The naturally aspirated works cars took home 6 podium positions (including 3 ought-right wins) during this same time period. Lesson learned, Nissan intentionally created the following 240RS Group B works car without turbo power. Keep in mind that the Safari Rally was always Nissan’s main focus in the WRC, and the benefits of simple, durable construction were seen as an advantage over outright speed and agility on this event. Unfortunately, this similar strategy for the 200SX did not work, as the new race format following the end of Group B included drastically reduced stage sizes, making speed a much greater factor than it was before on endurance events.
Wow, what a clean design this car was. There aren’t many cars to which you could add those aggressive ground effects and rear spoiler and still have it come out looking so clean. There’s a bit of Isuzu Piazza in those lines, which I didn’t notice back in the day.
I always felt the design cribbed a lot from the Lamborghini Jarama, especially how the windshield and hatch are at the same angle.
+1 on the body kit. Normally I’m not a fan, but this one looked pretty good. I still kinda like the 200SX a little better without it, though.
The funny thing was for me these were an “acquired” taste…I remember looking at them in ’86 when I instead ended up with a GTi, for some reason, though I did test drive the hatchback, I preferred the previous generation. Well, a few years later, my youngest sister bought a used ’85 coupe (she preferred that to a hatchback) which I got to work on for her…even bought the shop manual, and was very impressed…with both the car and the manual…it told you everything about that car…from built in diagnostics (didn’t need a scan tool to read out, I think it blinked the trouble codes to you) to the detailed schematics, which I used to troubleshoot lack of low beams…turned out it was a bad light switch in the stalk which I was able to bypass (would have been crazy expensive to replace the switch itself)..also found several vaccum leaks on it once when she dropped the car off for the weekend. The car was totalled in a hailstorm after a couple of years, and I really regretted it..but then she replaced it with another (next generation) 240sx coupe (1991). It was similarly totalled in another hailstorm, 3 years later to the day that her ’85 had been totalled.
Well, my middle sister likewise admired her car, and bought her own (a beautiful burgandy ’92 coupe) which she had for a few years until it was totalled in an accident in 1998. She liked the car so much she bought a brand new 1998 240SX coupe, (final year) which she still has. Several people have offered to buy the car from her, it has low mileage (though a few paint scrapes, still looks pretty good for a 16 year old car).
So, between 2 sisters, they’ve had 4 of them (well, qty-1 200SX and qty-3 240SX)..my other remaining sister never owned one…Interestingly I had a 1974 Datsun 710 iwhile going to college which I think was the sedan this family was started with (there was a really rare 710 coupe which came out before the 200SX), so I kind of think I started things out. Well, my youngest sister is gone now (died of Ovarian cancer 6 years ago next Friday) and of course I miss her, but also her taste in cars (which I also grew to appreciate). These cars will always remind me of her.
I had a chance to buy the V6 model, slightly wrecked, over a decade ago. I didn’t even know an SX could have a six until that model. But I was a little put off by how complicated the engine electronics looked and by how cramped the engine looked in the SX’s bay. I missed out on a great car.
They fly. Easily as quick as a 300ZX, and more than the equal of Supras and Starions of the era. Bonus is that with the proper exhaust, they sound identical to an Alfa Romeo V6.
As a huge RWD Datsun/Nissan fan, I find it hard to love the S12. The styling never quite worked for me in coupe or hatchback format. Having said that though, this one’s actually quite reasonable Perry, although the wheels don’t really go with it, they do, as others have noted above, soften the overall look fairly well.
These are often forgotten by many, one of these will always be ingrained in my brain as the first “talking” car I ever got to see in person, an older cousin of mine got a black hatchback with a 5 speed, and I remember going around the block in it, with him driving and he slows down to about 10mph and he says “open the door”, I pop the door open slightly and remember the “bong” “bong” tone and the robotic female voice “right door is ajar”.
I was fascinated.
A high school friend had one as his first car (he got it used as this was in 1995 or 96). Notchback coupe with the non-turbo motor. I wasn’t fond of the looks (I still don’t really like the notches, these worked much better as a hatchback) but the talking dash did amuse me.
This is Dave “Mr. 510” Carroll’s 200SX. That man’s a bit famous in VG-powered circles for his extensive experience with the VG engine series, especially the SOHC versions. He’s also built more 510s than either he or I care to count.
As for the decision to go V6 powered instead of CA18DET powered, it came down to US emissions regulations- the CA18ET met them, but the CA18DET did not. Which is why the Silvia Turbo RS-X was never sold in the US, and why it was unable to achieve enough sales in Japan to meet homologation rules. The VG30E was already US EPA compliant, and had wide appeal to people tired of 4-cylinder Japanese coupes.
An even more impressive engine we never got was the FJ20ET, for similar reasons. This engine was entirely race-bred and its punched-out carbureted NA brother, the FJ24, made 240hp from 2.4l in the early 1980s. Some say the FJ20ET is good to 500hp on stock internals, and that its innards are so strong, they’ve been known to literally chew up and spit out misplaced washers.
That’s my Twelve! 🙂 My best friend bought it from the original owner after we flew to Fort Collins Colorado to drive it back to Seattle. The car was his daily driver for a couple years and now it’s been my driver for a couple more. It was a factory automatic as most surviving clean SEs are. We five speed swapped it and I later installed an aluminum flywheel and Z31 Turbo clutch. It has a Nismo R200 LSD rear end, Z31T rear brakes, and Infiniti J30 front brakes. It’s fully de-smogged and has an MSD 6AL ignition, Blaster 2, and a Borla XR1 muffler. The rest is mostly original. The next major modification will be a top mount single turbo setup that I’ll offer as a kit once it’s fully sorted.
Hey,I farted in the passenger’s seat of this car….damn you irritable bowel!!
Hey, your car is making the rounds lately. It came up on one of the obscure car pages I follow on FB as well recently.
Yah it’s David’s car! One of the best ones around. Here it is next to my SE.