PRISTINE, ’96 NISSAN 300ZX IS FULL OF NOSTALGIA
Twin-turbocharged sports coupe brings back memories — some fond, others not so much
One of my favourite quotes is from a fairly obscure American journalist named Doug Larsen, who wrote — and I really am not making this up — for the Green Bay Press Gazette and Door County Advocate.
When it comes to the human penchant for delusionally wistful remembrance, Larson hit the nail on the head when he wrote “nostalgia is a file that removes the rough edges from the good old days.” I think when it comes to cars, nostalgia is — a lot like a predilection for cheerleaders and football captains — a love often best left unrequited. That’s because cars, like the twin-turbocharged, 1996 Nissan 300ZX we have here, don’t usually stand the test of time.
I mean, I was just getting started in this car testing thing when the 300ZX was new, and hardly being immune to those wistful remembrances of youth lost, remember it as truly hot sports coupe. The big question is how does its realistic performance today jive with my wistful nostalgia? Is it “what was I thinking ?” or is there at least an inkling of reality to my recollections? Actually, it’s a little of both. Since this is a 1996 300ZX, the twin-turbo 3.0-litre V-6 boasted a full 300 horsepower which was, back in the day, pretty stellar. And, truth be told, it still feels stout. With barely 6,000 kilometres on the odometer, I am pretty sure that zero to 100 km/ h will still take less than six seconds.
In fact, it could easily do better if it weren’t harnessed with the then-state-of-the-art four-speed automatic transmission. Indeed, while the engine feels fairly modern, the large gaps between gears and the tardy shifting truly feels yesteryear. Nonetheless, one certainly wouldn’t call the overall powertrain archaic.
The same can’t be said about the brakes.
Not completely delusional, I do remember the 300ZX’s discs as being sub-par, even for the day. Nonetheless, I was a little surprised at just how bad they truly are. Despite having four-piston calipers up front, the brake feel is wooden and there’s barely more stopping power than a set of drums. The problem is that the rotors are positively tiny. I don’t know exactly how tiny — and no one at Nissan Canada had a spec sheet going back that far — but any self-respecting Micra would be ashamed of such binders.
The 300ZX’s handling is more of a mixed bag. The steering is wonderfully light and linear, there’s precious little roll and plenty of grip available from the fairly meaty BFGoodrich tires (P245/50R16 out back and P225/50R16 up front).
On rough roads — and there are so very many here in Ontario — things get a little more suspect. This top-of-the-line version of the 300ZX had then de-rigueur two-position damping, but as far as I can see, the available choices were rock-hard and something as immovable as a Trump supporter’s loyalty.
One positive surprise is that I had forgotten how truly well designed the Nissan’s interior was. Even by today’s standards, the interior is marvellously well designed, though no matter how hard I searched my storage shed, I could not find a cassette to test the Bose audio system.
Nonetheless, my little ride through yesteryear was enlightening and not nearly as disappointing as I feared it would be.
One additional number may give more significant pause. Although decent 300ZXs can be had for around $15,000, a mint, low-mileage example like this one would surely push the $40,000 mark. That’s not really all that surprising, because Nissan Canada says this particular 300ZX cost $60,698 when it was new in 1996.
My calculator says that would translate into $90,201 in 2018. Larsen’s file certainly rounded that rough edge from my memory.