How good are early 90s Nissan 240SX?

[WhiteFC]

I'm looking for a FR that's got a good engine and reliability. I'm a university student so I don't have a lot of money. The early 90s 240s seem fairly affordable. I like the looks of the late 90s 240 (S15) but they are too expensive.

 

[skip0110]

A 240SX is not terribly fast, think 8-9 sec. to 60 and high- to mid- 16's in the 1/4. Really, there are better FR choices out there.

How about a similar vintage Thunderbird SC? It's a bigger, safer, more comfortable car...and you can expect high 6s-low 7s to 60 mph and low 15 in the 1/4. And there are plenty of sticks and automatics within your budget.

 

[JCE]

A 240SX is not terribly fast, think 8-9 sec. to 60 and high- to mid- 16's in the 1/4. Really, there are better FR choices out there.

How about a similar vintage Thunderbird SC? It's a bigger, safer, more comfortable car...and you can expect high 6s-low 7s to 60 mph and low 15 in the 1/4. And there are plenty of sticks and automatics within your budget.

Whoa, hold on there. As a former 240SX owner (1989 coupe) and a Thunderbird owner (1992) you can not compare the build quality, ride comfort, and looks. Ok, looks are subjective so I'll throw that out. However, bigger doesn't always mean better...and in this case it is true. Safer? Who really cares about that part, they are both old. Granted there may be better FR choices but think of his budget and his opinion. The 240SX has way more aftermarket also. I'm betting he'd prefer a foxbox GT Mustang or f-body V8 Camaro/Firebird over the Thunderbird anyway. Oh and I hated my Thunderturd so much I decided to do something good with it and GAVE IT TO CHARITY!

 

[skip0110]

Hmm...my friends 'Bird is a real nice handling car; the ride is a little firm and the interior is a bit squeaky but all together it's nicer than any Nissan I've been in.

*shrug* Just putting the option out there. You're right about the Fox and F-body, he should look at those as well.

 

[JCE]

You can get a 1987-1993 5.0 Mustang for around $2,800-3,500 in good enough running condition to last you a while--assuming he doesn't drive the hell out of it. As for the f-body you can get Camaro and Firebird V8's for CHEAP...even cheaper than the Mustangs. I've seen a 1993 Z28 (4th gen with LT1 = 275bhp!) run $4,000-5,000, while 3rd gens will run easily $2,000 all day long. Grab a manual 3rd gen f-body if you can...those are rare and very desirable. You can drop just about any small block Chevy + a T56 6spd in them and make them mega fast. I'm personally dropping the LT1 in mine.

Here's a 1993 Z28 right now on ebay for less than $4,000: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/93-Z...94QQihZ014QQcategoryZ6161QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

1989 Camaro: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Chev...50QQihZ017QQcategoryZ6161QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

1991 Mustang GT: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1991...48QQihZ009QQcategoryZ6236QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

As much as I love the 3rd gen f-body (I own one!) I'd grab the 1987-1993 Mustang GT, I can't explain why.

 

[exigeracer]

Get the 240SX - handles fairly good and put a little money into it and you're knocking on 13 second's door.

A good friend of mine is on his second - the first he drifted competitvely and was in the mid 13s on the strip. It also cost him 4,000$ total. I'm a firm believer in this car...

 

[Wolfe]

No offense, skip and exigeracer, but I don't think you guys have the right idea jumping into 0-60 times and drifting and such right off the bat. Not everyone is looking for that sort of thing -- if you look at WhiteFC's post, he's concerned about a solid engine, an overall reliable car, and one that's relatively inexpensive. Very reasonable criteria, in my opinion.

Anyway, here are my suggestions, in order of plausibility:
- BMW E30 3-series (1984-1991) -- very reliable, safe, great fun to drive, great gas mileage with the 4-cylinder models
- Mazda Miata (any that are within your price range) -- very reliable, economical, great fun to drive
- Volvo 240DL (80's) -- very reliable, safe, and unique
- Toyota Celica Supra (mk.II, aka "the early 80's one") -- pretty solid reliability, more powerful than the above cars, a cool sports-GT
- Toyota Supra (mk.III, aka "the late 80's one") -- pretty solid reliability, more powerful than the above cars, but not as cheap
- Nissan 300ZX (80's, not '89+) -- RUST!! Otherwise, turbocharged models are plenty quick, but NA ones are more reliable, fun to drive, and awesome 80's looks
- BMW E36 3-series (1992-1999) -- reliable, safe, fun to drive, good gas mileage, but rather expensive, depending on your price range
- Pretty much any 80's Mercedes-Benz, especially the E190 model, or a diesel, if you can stand the smoke and smell -- rock-solid reliability, very safe, but not very easy to find examples that are both inexpensive and in good shape

I personally wouldn't recommend the 240SX, not because it's a bad car, but because almost no matter what you're going to end up paying too much for one because of their popularity. They're also a more likely target for vandalism/theft than most other cars, again, because of their popularity. If you think you've found one for a decent price, and aren't worried about vandalism/theft, then the 240SX is a fairly reliable, fuel-efficient, fun-to-drive little coupe. Just don't go and do this to it.

 

[Jay]

I like the looks of the late 90s 240 (S15) but they are too expensive.

S15? I was not aware they were ever sold as 240sx's.

 

[Wolfe]

S15? I was not aware they were ever sold as 240sx's.

They weren't. I'm assuming he meant S14.

 

[WhiteFC]

Yea, sorry, meant the S14. Those b-tards at Nissan thinks we're not good enough for the Skylines and the cool looking S15.

I originally wanted to get an FC RX-7, but their reliablity and cost to run them worries me. I want a solid reliable coupe, 5 speed. Don't care about too much power or 1/4 mile times. Money is tight, and I don't want to be taking the damn thing to the shop every month to fix something.

Also, preferably, something Japanese from the late 80s to mid 90s.

 

[exigeracer]

Oh. I misunderstood what you wanted.

 

[toyomatt84]

I'd take the 240 over any US-comparison (especially those mentioned in this thread, thus far). It's much more reliable, in my opinion. And, it also has much better tuning ability, considering the structure doesn't weigh well over a ton. (Curb Weight: Thunderbird 3700lbs, 240SX 2600lbs)

 

[YSSMAN]

To be completely honest here, the Miata is going to be everything you want. It offers great performance that is easily adaptable depending on what you want as a driver, and the best part is, they are C-H-E-A-P. Given that the car remained the same for so long, parts are pretty much a dime-a-dozen, and given that the reliability of the cars is so strong, you aren't going to have much to worry about anyway.

...Added to that, as a College student I know what I kind of situation you are in, as I am one myself. From what I have dug-up, the Miata is quite cheap and quite easy to maintain. There are enough fan-sites on the internet for you to get fairly easy and reliable information, added to that most mechanics should be able to work on them, as they are fairly "simple" cars to begin with. Insurance is cheap, cheaper than my '96 Wolfsburg, and that is in comparison to a '96 M-Spec. I think the difference was almost $20 a month (if I remember correctly...).

Of course the biggest sacrafice is going to be the lack of a back-seat and the overall lack of space in general. Obviously the car is meant to be a baisic sports car, but I know plenty of people who use them as daily-drivers. If you aren't planning on carrying a large cooler of beer and a lady with you every day, you should be fine. Otherwise, you would have to go bigger... Much bigger. Added to that, shes a softie to begin with, and if the weather gets cold where you are, that could be a problem. There are hard-tops out there, and from what I understand they work well-enough, but it doesn't substitute for a true hardtop.

---

Personally, I'd stay away from the whole 240 SX thing. The car simply has become far too cliche these days, so why not do something different? You're comfortable with your sexuality, right? Why not the Miata?

---

...Otherwise there is always the Mustang GT and Camaro Z28/Firebird Formula option...

 

[Perfect Balance]

Personally, I'd stay away from the whole 240 SX thing. The car simply has become far too cliche these days, so why not do something different?

That's what is happening in my case. I liked 240sx's ever since I heard of them. It was uncommon to see them around where I live. Now I pass 3 on my way to school, and it's getting the sort of reputation civics have.

Miata's can be small for some people, plus the lack of space. A Mustang doesn't handle as good. RX-7's aren't very reliable. There isn't a lot of choices. You can always go for something "different" and "unique" But chances are it's going to cost more, cost more to maintain, have a small aftermarket, not be as good of a base car, have crappier performance. If you specifically want cheap RWD with good performance and aftermarket, the list gets narrowed down to like 2-3 cars.

The hardtops for Miatas also cost around as much as the car, so that sucks too.

 

[YSSMAN]

Go for the Merkur XR4Ti!!!

 

[Wolfe]

How about a front-engined rear-wheel-drive car with a 2400lbs. curb weight, 5 seats (okay, only 4 adults ), no softtop to worry about, and a decent trunk, that gets 30mpg, can do 0-60 in 10 seconds, and is rock-solid reliable (although you have to pay a fortune when things do break)?

What if I told you that you could probably find one somewhere near you for as little as $900, like this one here?

Okay, so I may be biased on this (understatement), but I honestly can't think of any better car that fits the criteria you've set. After all, I had very similar criteria when I set out to get a car, and look what I ended up with.

Also, preferably, something Japanese from the late 80s to mid 90s.

Have you considered a Toyota Cressida? It's basically a Lexus sedan of the 80's, before Lexus existed. It's a fairly large and comfy RWD sedan, but can be found for relatively cheap these days, partly because no one really knows what it is. It's a Toyota, so you know it'll be reliable, and it has the same engine as the Supra of its era, so it has a bit of "oomph" to it too. Fuel economy suffers a bit because of this, of course, but by and large the Cressida is one of the most practical cars out of all of the ones mentioned here.

Apart from the 240SX, Miata, and Cressida, there aren't really any other affordable RWD Japanese cars from the late 80's/early 90's. None that I can think of at the moment, anyway.

 

[Race Idiot]

Go for the Merkur XR4Ti!!!

Hahahahaha thats hardly reliable

 

[Revheadnz]

How about a front-engined rear-wheel-drive car with a 2400lbs. curb weight, 5 seats (okay, only 4 adults ), no softtop to worry about, and a decent trunk, that gets 30mpg, can do 0-60 in 10 seconds, and is rock-solid reliable (although you have to pay a fortune when things do break)?

What if I told you that you could probably find one somewhere near you for as little as $900, like this one here?

Okay, so I may be biased on this (understatement), but I honestly can't think of any better car that fits the criteria you've set. After all, I had very similar criteria when I set out to get a car, and look what I ended up with.

I'd agree with Wolfe on this, the thing about the E30s is that if it does break, it will cost a lot to repair IF you take it to BMW. There are huge numbers of these cars running about, you can find many parts for very cheap prices at wreckers if you want replacement parts or you could just buy another BMW .

 

[exigeracer]

That's what is happening in my case. I liked 240sx's ever since I heard of them. It was uncommon to see them around where I live. Now I pass 3 on my way to school, and it's getting the sort of reputation civics have.

Personally, I'd stay away from the whole 240 SX thing. The car simply has become far too cliche these days, so why not do something different? You're comfortable with your sexuality, right? Why not the Miata?

What ever you do FC, don't buy a certain car because of what people will think about you, like YSS and Balance want you to. It's the most insecure thing you can do. If the car is good, buy it. Bottom line.

Plus, YSS statement is a contradiction - he is saying avoid the 240SX because it has a bad image, but tehn states get the Miata even if it has a worse image.

 

[Perfect Balance]

What ever you do FC, don't buy a certain car because of what people will think about you, like YSS and Balance want you to. It's the most insecure thing you can do. If the car is good, buy it. Bottom line.

Plus, YSS statement is a contradiction - he is saying avoid the 240SX because it has a bad image, but tehn states get the Miata even if it has a worse image.

I never said not to get it, I'm still looking for one myself. Thats why I've said before in other posts that theres no reason to avoid a good idea because of it's popularity. I believe it was when someone told me not to do a silvia front end swap with an sr20det, because too much people already did that.

 

[YSSMAN]

Hahahahaha thats hardly reliable

Yeah, but it would be almost as cool as a Volvo 940 Turbo Sport!!! Did I mention that it has a Turbo!?!?!?

---

But in all seriousness, I've offered my opinion. The 240 is just so overdone these days, too much a part of the "Fast and Furious" drift thingy. I've seen 240s driving around here in Michigan that really shouldn't be driving around. Why? Kids want them because they think they are all going to be drift racers, risking their own lives by driving these cars that are falling apart.

But hey, if it is what you want, go for it. I would hope that you would find a late-model vehicle with low miles and that is in good condition, but chances are that many of them have allready been bought up.

---

BTW: I love the Cressidia nomination. If Toyota would being back that as a RWD alternative to the 300C and the Commodore/Impala, I'd simply die of laughter. But, it could be pretty cool at the same time!

 

[blargonator]

people know what cressidas are. its amazing whats going on with drifting, people are researching these things, there was a cressida in superstreet like a year ago that was pretty cool, twin turbo'ed i think.
i don't think you could get cressidas with a manual tranny, but if there were any it was probably a very limited number.

starting with a proven base such as the 240SX is good, why start with something else when you know what is already possible if you just want a simple car to have fun with.

i'd go with a toyota because i love 'em but a 240 would be a very good vehicle. i say go for it.

 

[JCE]

How about a 1st gen or early 2nd gen non-turbo MR2? You can get those very cheap. My brother's got an '85 N/A that we just rebuilt the US-spec motor/transmission and its a fantastic little car. I'm even thinking about getting one to play with myself next year. And as a plus you can drop the JDM 4A-GE 20v blacktop engine and get 160bhp+ before you even add a turbo/supercharger. Plus, its an old Toyota so you know its reliability is good.

 

[Lt.Doomsday]

There is no such thing as a reliable cheap used car and buying a 240SX is a bad idea.

Cousin picks up a 96' Black Saturn SC 2 Door:
$1,500 Bucks and it's headgasket is shot last time i talked to him

Friend gets a 94' Honda for this long commute everyday:
$1,250 and the tranmission gives out. Has to pay that much to get a rebuilt.

Sister's 94' Cavalier
$1,000. The motor had a little over 150,000 and developed the infamous "Knock Of Death" and the tranmission was starting to go.

 

[Jay]

Depends on the paticular car

I bought a $400 AUD 1979 Mazda 323 as a cheap daily years ago and it has never broken down for me so far and I have pushed it hard on many occasions.
The only thing that has gone wrong with it, is I rolled a tyre off the rim due to pushing the cheap skinny tyres too hard.

 

[Lt.Doomsday]

See, that's a lucky purchase.

I've been offered many of cars and for differant prices from $50 bucks to $900, from Audi all the way to old Z Roadsters and passed on them.

 

[Wolfe]

i don't think you could get cressidas with a manual tranny, but if there were any it was probably a very limited number.

I'm 95% sure they were automatic-only. If WhiteFC had said "manual only" I probably wouldn't have suggested them. They can be swapped to manual by using the transmission of the Supra, but, of course, that takes a lot of work.

There is no such thing as a reliable cheap used car

My '85 318i cost close to $2000 ($1750), stretching the definition of "cheap," but has given me very little trouble.

A friend of mine bought a crappy '89 Sentra for $225, and other than a bad clutch, it worked well enough to get around. He gave it to his mom, who didn't know how to use the clutch quite right, and she totally fried it over the course of two weeks, to the point where it wouldn't move, and junked it. The car could have easily lasted quite a while if they would have replaced the clutch, reattached the exhaust system that fell off , and did basic maintenance.

Another friend of mine used a $300 '89 Jetta to get to and from work for a few months. It had some problems and was really annoying to drive (engine would die on you at stoplights, clutch was bad, speedo made loud whine, back doors didn't work), but it always got him where he needed to go. The car was totalled by a nasty hail storm.

That same friend also once had a $100 '90 Cressida that he would speed around in, flooring the throttle from stoplights and powersliding often. It lasted for a couple months until he blew the headgasket and mistakenly sold the car, not knowing that the headgasket could be replaced for cheap if he did the labor himself, or had a friend do it.

Then there was the $600 '88 Camry that lasted for a year or two. It was junked when a high-school auto class snapped every single one of the rust-ridden bolts they came across and ruined all of the engine/tranny seals while trying to replace the worn clutch, but served its purpose reliably up until that point.

Finally, there's the $200 '85 Accord and $1500 '85 Celica Supra that were bought by my friends 1-2 years ago, and are still being driven today, and the $500 '86 RX-7 that, despite being an RX-7, has less than 60,000miles on it and is pristine.



From my experience, cheap used cars can be very reliable, getting you where you need to go and usually falling victim to unfortunate circumstances rather than a catastrophic mechanical failure. Of course, you get what you pay for, so you can't expect something that looks nice and isn't annoying to drive.

 

[a6m5]

I agree on couple of points made in this thread:

• Reliability depends on the paticular used car. If I feel that I made good enough effort to check out the used car I am buying, I would feel pretty good about it.
• I don't care about what people think about Miatas and Civics. My brother counted out buying Integra because of this. Who effin' cares? I'd pick the car I want. If it's a good car and there are a lot of them on the road, that probably means that car is nice. On the other hand, if you see a lot of Taurus on the road, that probably means Ford is very good at selling fleet vehicles, plus the price of a used Taurus rivals that of a used Kias.

It's a damn shame Miata doesn't come with hardtop. Two of my coworkers recently bought Miatas and they both had to replace the tops. Then again, it is pretty cool to have a convertible during the summer and chicks dig Miatas.

I personally like the choice of 240SX. Miata would be more sporty and fuel efficient(which is REALLY nice), but 240 would be much roomier with additional (emergency?)seating and has solid roof! Depends on what you want in a car, I think. I don't think Stangs and T-Birds are bad ideas, but I get the feeling FC is not really into them.

 

[Biggamehit]

Im a 240 owner and builder of 4 years, I love my car, i drive and S13 with an KA-t. also early 90 240s are s13 not s15 ( s15 never made it to the states)

personly i would say get the car great balance, rotors all the way around etc, if you wanna tune, big market. i also was a college student/athlete and was still able to mod. biggest issue with 240s are it depends where you get them from, areas with snow and salt rain will make them rust and areas like AZ will sun beat the hell out of them but will have no rust. I perform all my own work, if you think hondas are easy to work on, 240s are even easier.

also those back seats are just there for looks, 240 is not a family car lol. only one person can sit back there and they have to sit sideways to be comfortable.
heres my car.


fully gutted and ready for roll cage

 

[JCE]

There is no such thing as a reliable cheap used car and buying a 240SX is a bad idea.

I'd say this isn't entirely accurate. I've bought plenty of "cheap" cars that lasted me a year or more with me driving the hell out of them. On January 11th 2000 I bought my Camaro with 117k miles on it for $2700. The first thing I did was replace the radiator with a larger capacity one. And I drove it 2 of the 3 years like I stole it and NEVER had one problem with it. Then I sold it to my brother for $300 and he drove it for another 3+ years...and it's still got all the original engine components with exception of the radiator, water pump, and thermostat. Now with 215k miles I'm about to start driving it everyday and get rid of my Focus and I bet it will last another 15k-20k miles before I put in my performance LT1 engine.

Cousin picks up a 96' Black Saturn SC 2 Door:
$1,500 Bucks and it's headgasket is shot last time i talked to him

Saturns around here have the notorious reputation of being mechanically unstable. How many miles did the car have when he bought it? And I'm willing to bet the previous owner(s) didn't do the timing check at the dealer upon the required mileage amount.

Friend gets a 94' Honda for this long commute everyday:
$1,250 and the tranmission gives out. Has to pay that much to get a rebuilt.

A 1994 Honda ...? Again this has everything to do with how the car is driven and the ownership. I've seen Hondas with 200k miles run better than ones with 100k.

Sister's 94' Cavalier
$1,000. The motor had a little over 150,000 and developed the infamous "Knock Of Death" and the tranmission was starting to go.

The part in bold is the problem here. Cavaliers and Sunbirds are pieces of feces. They are one of the worst cars on the road. I know early Kias with better reliability.

Service history plays a huge role in how the car will perform for you. This is one thing that lacks in North America that Europe/Japan/Australia doesn't. More used cars with actual service history proof that can be provided to perspective buyers.

And on topic in reference to the 240SX, I bought a 1989 240SX with 140k miles and drove the living hell out of it and it NEVER broke down or so much as had one little blip on the service radar. I put 50k miles on it driving it like a Formula 1 car and never had an issue with it. I'm VERY pleased at it's reliability...and the previous owner infact drove it the same way that I did according to the person I bought it from. We all may have an opinion as to what car we think he or she should get...but there's no question that you can find a reliable used car for little money.