A 1999 tribute to the twin-turbo monsters of Japan
The death of a Breed

In the automotive world there are certain cars that are always meant to be lusted after, but never owned. Among this elite group of vehicles were the Japanese super cars. I am speaking of the likes of Nissan's 300ZX Turbo, Mazda's RX-7 Turbo, And the Toyota Supra Turbo. Unfortunately the Japanese supers have become all but extinct in America, and will never rise again to their former glory.

The Mazda RX-7 Turbo was a car enthusiast's dream. Awesome looks, superb handling, and a twin turbocharged two-rotor Wankel engine good for 255 hp. The only drawback? The price, a top of the line RX-7 went for about ,500 in 1996. After the 1996 model year Mazda discontinued the RX-7, citing low sales. This excerpt form the May 1999 issue of Road & Track proves that the RX-7 as it was in 1996 is not coming back. "Mazda is considering bringing a less-expensive RX-7 back to the U.S. a normally aspirated 200 hp side-port engine."

When Nissan first started production of their Z-car 29 years ago, it was a great all-around sports car with a modest price. By 1996 their 300ZX Turbo was a monster with a monstrous price. A 3.0-liter twin turbocharged dohc 24 valve V-6 engine endowed the Nissan's sleek body with 300 hp. The performance of the 300ZX was equally impressive, 0-60 mph in 6.0 seconds, the quarter mile in 14.4 seconds, and a top speed of 155 mph. All of the high-tech equipment in the car also drove the price up to ,900 for a top of the line 300ZX. Like the RX-7, Nissan's Z-car will never be what it once was. An article from the May 1999 issue of Road & Track verifies the demise of the 300ZX. " While Z-car production continues at a very slow pace in Japan, the car as we know it will never return to America." At the end of 1996, Nissan announced that it was discontinuing sales of the 300ZX in America, with good reason too. The October 1995 issue of Road & Track provided insight on these reasons. "The Z-car has fallen victim, along with other full-blooded sports cars, to the whims of the marketplace - Just 6,220 of them were sold in 1994. Why? Expensive to buy, expensive to insure, limited practicality."

Toyota's Supra Turbo was a true rice rocket, Much deserving of its high rear wing. Motivation came from a 3.0-liter twin turbocharged dohc 24 valve inline-6 power plant that produced 320 hp. The engine was coupled to a 6-speed transmission, and an independent rear end. Using this equipment, the Supra could post some incredible number, 0-60 mph in 5.3 seconds, the quarter mile in 13.7 seconds, and a 155-mph top speed. The Supra's performance didn't come without a price, a rather steep one too, the top of the line version ringing up at ,600 in 1996. It was the Supra's price that brought Toyota to end sales of it after 1998. This excerpt from the October 1998 issue of Road & Track spells it out simply. "The news for the enthusiast is sad: say farewell to the magnificent but slow-selling Supra."

All of three of the cars, the RX-7 Turbo, The 300ZX Turbo and the Supra Turbo all had two things in common. The good quality they all shared was that of a true sports car with great looks, good handling, and awesome power which enabled blinding speed. The negative commonality was their price, each of the being exorbitantly expensive for the average person to afford. An article about upcoming Japanese sports cars in the March 1999 issue of Road & Track sums up the story on the death of these Japanese super cars very nicely. "They fell victim to the lure of high-tech gadgets and gizmos that, despite enhancing their performance, drove up their prices as well. The Mazda RX-7, Nissan 300ZX, Toyota MR2 and Toyota Supra all began life as affordable sports cars, but gradually evolved into virtual exotics with price tags that far exceeded the resources of their core audience. As a result, those cars are gone." The Japanese super cars are not coming back either, their modern-day counterparts being simpler, more affordable sports cars just like they used to be, which makes one wonder, is history going to repeat itself?

A Road&Track style comparison piece
Mopar Vs. Jaguar

For car buffs there are some cars that were never meant to be compared. For example, comparing a Shelby 427 Cobra with a Porsche 911 seems ridiculous since they are in no way alike. Going back to 1969, however, I believe I have found one of the most interesting comparisons of two cars that at a glance would seem polar opposites. The cars? A 1969 Jaguar XKE coupe and a 1968 Plymouth Barracuda fastback. These two cars are remarkably similar in design, yet they evolved from two totally different design philosophies.

One Mopar, one Jaguar, from the outside they look totally different. The Jaguar possesses grace and finesse, while the Plymouth extrudes a powerful, muscular air. Opening the bonnet on the E-type reveals Jaguar’s famous Dohc straight six hemi, pop the hood on the ‘Cuda and one of Chrysler’s small block commando V8s greets you. This, however, is where the major differences end. Both the Plymouth and the Jaguar are of steel unit-body construction with front and rear sub-frames. The body type of the two cars are different only in that the ‘Cuda has a trunk lid while the E-type has a side-opening hatch lid. The Barracuda is also significantly larger than the Jaguar, measuring 20.2 inches longer, 6.3 inches wider, and sitting 5.3 inches higher. Even with the ‘Cuda being larger, the cars weigh in at almost the same weight, the Jaguar actually the heavier of the two at 3,020 pounds, compared to 2,950 pounds for the ‘Cuda. Brakes on both cars are discs in the front, but the Jaguar has the distinct advantage in this department with discs at the rear as well for a total swept area of 273 sq. in/ton. The Barracuda has drum brakes at the rear and a total swept area of 213.36 sq. in/ton. Both cars have independent torsion bar front suspension, the Jaguar also having an independent rear suspension with upper driveshaft arms, lower A-arms, and radius arms. The ‘Cuda uses a much simpler solid axle located by two outboard-mounted asymmetrical leaf springs. Steering is quite different between the ‘Cuda and the Jag, stemming from the wheelbase and the number of turns lock-to-lock on each car. The ‘Cuda’s steering is rather slow with a high 3.5 turns lock-to-lock and a 108.0 inch wheelbase. In contrast the Jaguar’s steering is very responsive being only 2.5 turns lock-to-lock and residing on a 96.0 inch wheelbase.

Going through the drive train of the Jaguar and the Barracuda, more similarities appear. The engines, although different in type, are close in displacement, the ‘Cuda’s 4,473 cubic centimeters edging out the Jaguar’s 4,235 cubic centimeters by only .238 of a liter. The Jag engine produces a hearty 245 Hp @ 5500 rpm, while the ‘Cuda engine only pumps out 235 Hp @ 5200 rpm. A look at engine torque flips the coin, the ‘Cuda’s V8 churning out 280 ft/lb of torque @4000 rpm over the jag’s 263 ft/lb @ 3000 rpm. In the Jaguar, power is passed through a 4-speed manual transmission and then on to the positraction differential (via a short propeller shaft) and finally out to the wheels through a driveshaft/upper suspension arm on each side of the car.

In the ‘Cuda, power is transmitted from the engine to a 3-speed automatic transmission, then through a traditional driveshaft to a solid-axle positraction rearend.

In any sports car comparison, one of the most important factors is the quantitative results. Actual measurements of a car’s performance are the ultimate in comparisons. If these measurements were the sole deciding factor, the better of these two cars would be made clear. The Jaguar XKE comes out on top with these numbers: 0-60mph in 8.0 seconds and the ¼ mile in 15.7 seconds @ 86mph. The Plymouth Barracuda was a consistent 1.2 seconds behind going

-60mph in 9.2 seconds and doing the ¼ mile in 16.9 seconds @ 85.6mph. When looking at these numbers, it becomes apparent that these two cars are only similar, not alike, each one has its distinct personality and characteristics. The ‘Cuda has an automatic transmission and the Jag has a manual, that could have skewed the numbers, but it really doesn’t matter because they will always be different cars. After all, if two cars are the same, how are they comparable?