Nissan 240 C 2-2

For copyright infringement and removal of materials - miroslakkloze@yandex.ru
Loading...


Keywords: Nissan 240 C 2-2
Description: Read about how we test the all new Nissan 240sx, and the Acura CL, only in Motor Trend magazine

Despite the old adage, clothes don’t make the man (or woman, as the case may be). Nor do we put much faith in the maxim that says, “You are what you drive.” But, we assert, how you decorate and surround your body says a lot about what you’d like to be. And the sportingly elegant sheetmetal that graces both the SE and ‘s debutant, the 2.2CL, says, “I’m in a hurry to surpass my current, already enviably elevated state of success to reach the pinnacle of prosperity.”

At first glance, the 2.2CL and 240SX SE seem extremely closely matched. They’re both Japanese-branded coupes with nominal seating for five. Their base prices are each within $100 of an affordable $22,200; when equipped as they were for this test both cost within $1000 of $24,500. Both are loaded with indulgences once reserved for top-of-the-line luxury cars. Both are powered by sophisticated overhead-cam, four-valve-per-cylinder, inline four-cylinder engines, each of which displaces 2300 cubic centimeters, plus or minus 150 cc, and pumps out 150 horsepower, give or take five ponies. Both have refined, fully independent suspensions, four-wheel disc brakes, and 16-inch aluminum wheels shod with 205/55VR16 tires.

Both manufacturers’ respective marketing departments aspire to position their cars as sophisticated luxury coupes that have been flavored with a dash of sportiness. The marketeers have tried to carve images far from the hard-edged performance pose of the likes of the and. Both companies see their cars as alternatives for buyers-especially successful single or non-child-encumbered women-who long for, but can’t yet afford, the likes of the SC 300 and 325is.

Yet despite their many parallels, after living with this pair for a few weeks, an increasing number differences became apparent and, arguably, more significant than the similarities.

For starters, while the Nissan rides a cargo ship from Japan to these shores, the Acura was designed and is constructed in the good old U.S. of A.; its engine is built in Anna, Ohio, with final assembly in nearby East Liberty.

The Nissan puts its power to the ground through its rear wheels in the manner of traditional sports cars, and it pays the price of reduced interior room to gain delicious edge-of-the-envelope handling, which few of its owners will ever sample. Conversely, the Acura is a front-driver, a configuration that provides lavish interior room in a svelte exterior package and offers stable but unexciting handling in extreme situations.

Combined with its drivetrain choice, the CL‘s whopping 7.5-inch-longer wheelbase means the Acura can comfortably accommodate four adults, while the Nissan’s rear seat is better suited to briefcases and purses than to humans. (With the driver’s seat set for a 5-foot, 9-inch driver, even a five-year-old found the rear legroom inadequate.)

The differences continue. The CL’s transversely mounted 2.2-liter single-overhead-cam engine is a significant 233 cubic centimeters smaller than the 240‘s longitudinally placed 2.4-liter double-overhead-cam engine. The result: The Acura powerplant peaks at 145 horsepower at 5500 rpm, compared with the Nissan’s 155 at 5600 rating. At the test track, the 240SX’s power edge combined with its rear-drive handling advantages and the higher dry-road grip of its Toyo tires (over the ride-, quiet-, and mileage-oriented Michelins on the Acura) to help it emerge victorious in every performance category.

Fitted with the standard-issue five-speed manual transmission, the 240‘s 8.1-second run in the 0-60-mph sprint was a significant 0.8 second quicker than the 2.2CL’s 8.9-second jaunt. At the end of the quarter mile, the Nissan still held a 0.6-second edge, recording a 16.1-second/85.3-mph run, versus the Acura‘s 16.7/83.7. In the handling tests, the Nissan’s wins were less pronounced though still notable: 127 versus 129 feet in 60-0-mph stopping distance, 0.85 versus 0.82 g on the skidpad, and a 66.0-mph run through the slalom compared with the Acura’s 65.3.

In price, though the Acura’s base of $22,110 is but $139 less than the Nissan’s $22,249, by the time the 240SX SE is loaded with options that bring it up to rough parity with the as-tested CL, the Nissan’s bottom line is a significant $1808 higher: $25,503 to the CL’s $23,695. The Acura’s price edge is due in part to it being completely constructed in the U.S.

Even the model years of these two are different. The 2.2CL was introduced early this year as a ’97. (Government regulations allowed car makers to start selling ’97s in early January 1996.) Since the ’97 Nissans were just a gleam in the production manager’s eye when this comparison was conducted, the 240SX SE we tested was a ’96.

The CL made its debut just before Acura celebrated its 10th anniversary as this country’s first Japanese luxury import marque. This sixth Acura model-joining the Integra, NSX, TL, SLX, and RL-is designed to fill the niche between the sportier, cheaper Integra coupe and the more luxurious and more expensive TL sedan. The 2.2CL is the first of two variants to debut, with the V-6-powered 3.0CL to hit showrooms this fall. The CL is offered in the U.S. and Canada, but not in Hong Kong, the only other country where the Acura brand appears.

While recording our real-time driving impressions, more than once we called the CL “the Accord Coupe.” From the driver’s seat, it feels a great deal like a super-luxury edition Accord Coupe-and for good reason: Identical in both cars are wheelbase, suspension design, height, track, width, bore, stroke, horsepower, and torque. The CL retains the Accord’s livability and promise of unquestioned reliability, and shares the Accord Coupe’s peppy performance and responsive, predictable handling. To this, the marketers have added Acura prestige, a host of additional luxury features, and one thing the CL doesn’t share with the Accord Coupe: chic new sheetmetal.

In recent years, Acura and have been accused of being overly conservative in styling: The virtually identical and nearly invisible TL and RL are testimony. In January 1995 Acura unveiled the radically styled CL-X show car, saying the production CL would look very much like that creation of Honda’s Torrance, California, studios. However, the CL retains only the essence of the CL-X’s aggressive rear end, and little of the show car’s exciting bird-of-prey snout. The final result is pleasingly different from the norm, but far from the shocking head-turner the CL-X promised.

The CL’s 2.2-liter SOHC four-cylinder engine employs a version of the same Variable Valve Timing and Lift Electronic Control (VTEC) that appears on most Honda-produced engines. This edition varies the timing of only the intake valves. A low-lift, short-duration cam profile is designed to fully fill the cylinders at low engine speeds. Above 2300-3200 rpm, depending on engine load, the intake valves are controlled by high-lift, long-duration cam lobes to maximize upper-end power. Funny how expectations and perceptions change: When this engine is bolted in a Honda, it seems composed, muted, and more than adequately peppy; slap an Acura badge on the hood, and it becomes noisier and not as potent as expected.

The 2.2CL comes about as fully loaded as can be imagined, including automatic climate control, a premium AM/FM/CD sound system, a power glass sunroof, remote keyless entry, and a security system. In fact, the only factory-installed options available are leather seats and an electronically controlled four-speed automatic transmission; our tester was equipped with the former but not the latter.

The CL‘s interior is as warm and comfortable as a reserved spot at a private club. Handsome wood trim and supple leather surround the driver and passengers. The cowhide used in the Acura seems a much higher grade than that used in the Nissan. The CL wins every interior dimension category, save front headroom, where the 240SX boasts a small victory. But it’s in rear seat room that the CL swamps its opponent, by a huge 1.6 inches in headroom, a gargantuan 10.2 inches in minimum legroom, and a whopping 10.9 inches in shoulder room. Its more commodious trunk features a pass-through door to the passenger compartment for carrying long items-most likely skis.

The second-generation 240SX feels as if it’s been with us for several years, but ’96 was only its second model year. Similar to the CL’s early debut, the redesigned 240SX appeared in early 1994 with a ’95 label. With the ’95 model-year revision, Nissan softened the 240SX’ appearance and positioning, dressing it more as a luxury coupe and less as the hot hatchback. Indeed, the liftback option was deleted. Despite this retooling and repositioning, the 240SX retains most of its previous sensations: It still handles sumptuously at the limit, and performance is sprightly, but its balance-shaftless inline-four is too raucous and its interior too stark to hide its sporty roots under the new luxury-oriented disguise.

The 240SX received minor changes for ’96, including a new front grille and upgraded seat cloth. (Our tester came with the optional leather seats.) Nissan sources say that we can expect some additional external freshening to the 240SX for ’97.

Both the base model and the uplevel 240SX SE are powered by the same 2.4-liter/155-horse DOHC four. With a potent torque peak of 160 pound-feet at 4400 rpm, this engine offers strong low-end performance, but with the flexibility to rev all the way to 6500 rpm. The SE edition gets a rear anti-roll bar (to accompany the base car’s front bar), stiffer shock and strut valving, and 16×6.5-inch aluminum wheels (compared with the base car’s 15×6.0 steel wheels). Inside, the SE boasts white-faced instruments; a 160-watt, six-speaker AM/FM/CD audio system; cruise control; and power door locks. To distinguish an SE from a base car, look for the front chin spoiler and rear decklid spoiler. Bundled in the $2699 “Leather and Security” option package found on our tester were a viscous limited-slip differential and anti-lock brakes-a feature that’s standard on the Acura. Among the few available options not included on our tester are the electronically controlled four-speed automatic transmission and power glass sunroof, the latter a standard feature on the CL.

The 240‘s stark, black wraparound instrument panel feels very 300ZX-like. While its steering offers finer-honed, more-alive feedback, its suspension, which features MacPherson struts up front and a multilink arrangement in the rear, is far less pampering than the CL’s. Its seats are snugly supportive for trim folks, but are a tight fit for the wider of girth. The 240SX’ one-piece fold-down rear seatback means the Nissan can accommodate a wider variety of items than can the Acura. Another Nissan advantage: Its outside mirrors fold in to forgive minor parking indiscretions, while the Acura’s rigid mirrors may mean an expensive trip to the body shop for a similar error.

The Nissan is an entertaining and sophisticated sport coupe that’s more connected to the sportier side of the brain. Despite the recent heavy dose of luxury flavoring, it’s a car that will make you look good on a twisty back road and attract glances when cruising trendy nightspots.

By the time we had to choose a winner of this comparison, our votes had changed more times than the Dow Jones industrial average on a triple-witching day. The Acura is less expensive, but by only 8 percent. The Nissan outperforms and outhandles the Acura, but those looking for roadrockets are more likely to consider-and are better served-by the less-expensive likes of the Integra GS-R or Camaro Z28. The 2.2CL is a true four-seater, while the 240SX is a tight fit for two adults-but then owners of either of these two will rarely haul more than themselves. The 2.2CL is a competent, reliable coupe dressed in amusing new bodywork and loaded with luxury features, while the 240SX SE is a sporty coupe that has been lathered with luxury sauce.

So, we came up with this hedged answer: If performance is a priority, rear-drive handling on a twisty backroad is something you can exploit, you rarely find the need to haul more than two people, and your finances are such that the price difference doesn’t matter, the 240SX SE is your choice. However, we’re guessing most shoppers in this category will be more swayed by the Acura’s practical prestige, spacious gracious interior, small but notable price advantage, and classy new bodywork. Our victor in this showdown: the Acura 2.2CL.



Photogallery Nissan 240 C 2-2:







Photographs Nissan 240 C 2-2 - auto5.borzii
Photographs Nissan 240 C 2-2 - sa1.1-themes
Photographs Nissan 240 C 2-2 - sa6.1-themes







Nissan 240SX (S13) at The Need for Speed Wiki - Need for Speed ...
Photographs Nissan 240 C 2-2 - auto5.borzii
Photographs Nissan 240 C 2-2 - sa6.1-themes







Night Import: Event Coverage: XDC/Remix Event (Pt. III)
Night Import: Event Coverage: XDC/Remix Event (Pt. III)
nissan 240sx -- excelencia automovilistica - Taringa!







Nissan 240SX (career) by MCP-type-R Images #269112 | Need For ...
TX smoked s14 kouki tails
Nissan s13 / 240sx / 180sx / Sil80 on Pinterest | Nissan 240sx ...







Autos de la saga Rapidos y Furiosos - Taringa!
My CNC build thread - testing - Nissan Forum | Nissan Forums
Nfs Shift 2 Drift Photos







Nissan Z-car - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nissan Silvia , 240 sx, s13, s14, s15 | 240sx <3 | Pinterest
Nissan 240sx S14 | 240sx | Pinterest