1990 Nissan 300ZX Reviews - Page 5 of 9

1990 Nissan 300ZX 3.0L from North America

Model year1990
Year of manufacture1990
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 3.0L Automatic
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.3 / 10
Distance when acquired136000 miles
Most recent distance140000 miles
Previous carHonda Accord

Summary:

I love my Z!

Faults:

Right now at 139,000 the brakes started to squeak a bit under light pressure braking.

While running the A/C I have a slight knocking sound, which I think is the A/C fan.

The BOSE system does not function properly. The power attena does not work. Also has slight wear on the drivers seat left side. From what I gather these are all common symptoms of the car.

General Comments:

Other than the stuff above, the car is in great shape. Nothing too bad is wrong with the car. I am very pleased with it.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 14th September, 2004

1990 Nissan 300ZX 3.0 twin turbo from North America

Year of manufacture1990
First year of ownership1992
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 3.0 twin turbo Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Dealer Service marks 3 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.6 / 10
Distance when acquired50000 miles
Most recent distance100000 miles
Previous carToyota Supra

Summary:

The best sports car that Japan can make

Faults:

I race this car every season and here is the only thing wrong with it.

I have replaced the Transmission 6 times every 20,000 miles or so.

Clutch has been replaced 12+ times. Usuallly lasts for about 10,000 miles.

Everything else has been great.

General Comments:

I have gotten over 500hp's at the rear wheels.

Top speed has been over 195mph. with a stock block and heads. Only turbo and computer tunning was able to generate almost double the horsepower.

Car still rides smooth as glass. The body style is timeless.

Last of the "real" turbo cars from Japan.

No four wheel, front wheel, or rotary engine junk. Pure Rear Wheel drive "head back to the seat" torque. Drift driver.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 2nd September, 2004

7th Jul 2005, 18:30

You little girls and your Z's, why don't you buy a real sports car like an RX7. I don't mean to brag, but my rotary "junk" will smash all your Z's to pieces. I'm so confident that I'd put up the pinks, and I would not even think twice. The Mazda rules all in the sports car world, and if you don't believe it go ask someone who knows about cars. The rotary will smash your piston powered pieces of garbage, and not to mention with hella ease. I can only hope that one day you little sissies and your Z's, will come to my neck of the woods and get beaten and battered.

16th Jul 2005, 20:06

You guys astound me. Get over yourselves. I guarantee that there are Zs faster than your RX7, and there are RX7s faster than this guy's Z. There's ALWAYS a faster car than yours unless you purposefully get it built to break records. Don't come on here to talk smack about someone else's car, this is just one person's opinion of his Z. Leave him be, and go brag about your car in your own review.

2nd Aug 2005, 22:48

500 hp at the wheels is actually a realistic number for a twin turbo 300ZX. With a basic Stillen ECU, a performance intake, aftermarket exhaust manifolds, and turbo-back exhaust system, you can get over 400hp to the wheels pretty easily (not crank, wheels). I don't know what mods this guy has, but if he got larger turbos or machine work done, 500hp is pretty weak compared to some of the 600+ WHP 300zx monsters that I've seen... I doubt he's burned up so many clutches or transmissions like he's stated, but as far as 500 WHP is concerned, it's a very realistic claim. Only he REALLY knows.

1990 Nissan 300ZX Z32 3.0L twin turbo, Intercooled (VG30DETT) from Australia and New Zealand

Year of manufacture1990
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 3.0L twin turbo, Intercooled (VG30DETT) Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired120000 miles
Most recent distance152000 miles

Summary:

Best Quick Car For The Price

Faults:

My headlight Bulb blew within 6months of owning it.

Clutch was replaced as it died after 8months (driven hard though)

Brake Pads replaced after 30,000ks.

02 Sensor's replaced after a year of owning it.

General Comments:

This car is extremely quick.

Never had engine problems.

Best bang for your buck.

Very comfy & well set out interior.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 23rd May, 2004

1990 Nissan 300ZX 2 seater NA V6-NA from North America

Year of manufacture1990
First year of ownership2000
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission V6-NA Automatic
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired93000 miles
Most recent distance111000 miles
Previous carJeep CJ5

Summary:

Best car in it's class, nothing compares

Faults:

Exhaust system needed replacment.

Replaced radiator hose.

Drivers seat left boulster pad has wear marks (as it does on almost all Z's).

BOSE stereo system needed replacment.

Electric Antenna has failed twice.

AC system failed.

General Comments:

For the money, there aren't too many performance cars that can touch the Z. The non-turbo and turbo model have plenty of power, and can outperform any other car in its class. With only an exhaust modification I have dropped the 0-60 times to just over 6 seconds for the non-turbo.

The handling is similarly amazing, Nissan developed 4 wheel steering for this car nearly 14 years ago, and the car handles like it's on rails. I have heard some complaints about the handling on wet surfaces, however I have yet to encounter any problems in wet weather.

My 300 ZX has been family owned for nearly 10 years, other than some regular maintenance the car runs flawlessly. Aside from some AC work I have no complaints at all with this quality machine. I know many owners with well over 150,000 miles on their engines.

The interior is simple, and well laid out. There are no un-needed gauges, the tachometer and speedometer are nice and large (as they should be on a sports car). The AC/Heat controls are within easy reach while driving. The seats are comfortable and provide proper support, although on a long drive they become a bit uncomfortable. For a car this size, and in this class there really is a lot of trunk space. The only minor complaint I have with the interior is that the center controls (namely the radio) seem just out of reach while sitting back in the seat.

The exterior of the car is very well done. I have kept my Z in pretty nice shape, and not many people would suspect the car is 14 years old. The lines are still modern, and the wide girth and low profile only add to its appeal. I would take a new 300 over the newer 350.

All in all my experience has been a good one. I have no problems at all with this car. Full synthetic oil changes, and premium fuel can be a detriment; but when you get behind the wheel all is forgotten. I can't wait to get my hands on a twin turbo.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 4th December, 2003

8th Dec 2003, 20:19

You mention that the boot is rather spacious for its type. I was thinking of getting a 2+2 seater, but would prefer a 2 seater. I have a 280zx and I enjoy playing golf and require the back seats to fit my clubs. Is there enough space in the boot to fit a bag of golf clubs or should I get a 2+2 seater.

10th Dec 2003, 02:35

I am an avid golfer, and there is plenty of room for clubs. I can easily fit a full-size cart bag (without too much else in the back). One of the reasons I chose this car was actually for the size on the trunk.

I think the 2+2 has the same rear dimensions as the 2 seater, so you should be fine with the trunk space.

9th Feb 2006, 18:14

Nissan 350z's, even without a turbo setup are still faster than the twin turbo 300zx's, and have better handling so I would much rather have a 350.

27th Feb 2006, 16:50

If you check out the 0-100km times the twin turbo 300zx is around the 5.5 second mark. Non-turbo 350Z is about 6.5 sec mark. I was disappointed with the 350Z, it's lack of style, lack of 'real' power, and it's toned down characteristics in general. The 300ZX is still easily the most desirable car in my opinion.

11th Oct 2006, 04:32

It must be remembered that in the Z series of cars the number stands for the cubic centimeters of engine displacement. A 300ZX is 3.0 liter and a 350ZX is 3.5 liter. The size of engine should be more powerful, but I do not have experience with the 350ZX. Also the originator is the 240Z which is 2.4 liter in-line 6 cylinder.

7th Feb 2008, 09:31

This was proven in a drag race on Top Gear (British motoring programme) between a 300ZX Twin Turbo and a 350Z. The 350Z was left standing. It wasn't even close.

11th Nov 2008, 12:52

I actually just watched that video, and it was very close! The 300zx still won, actually the 350 took off a little quicker but after the turbos spooled up he passed him.

Average review marks: 7.1 / 10, based on 33 reviews