Why '73? California's up to '76 now for no smog....
Well, cause...
240 is definatly where its at!
The 280's also have a 2.8L instead of a 2.4L. If you put a E31 head (early 240) on a 2.8 you will have a high compression engine with stock parts. You should at least put the 280 valves in so it will breath.
You can also punch out the 2.8 block to a 3100 (could involve your crank though
) and have a really nice engine. This was my original plan back in 98 or so when I had mine, but stupid decisions and stupid people helped change that.
I didn't pop the hood on this one to see what's under there, but I'll see in due time. I was really surprised by how smooth it was so they may have been changed. Mine had dual webers, but I don't know which ones they were. Wait, I think they were 32/36s, cause I seem to remember my brother saying they wasted their time getting those carbs. I came pretty close to buying a 73 with triple mikunis once, but then again that was back when they still had to be smogged and there's NO WAY those things woulda passed! Woulda been a pita to tune, but definate potential.
wtf? since when. I thought the stopped doing the yearly advance of not having smog? 
I do believe you're correct sir. I'm pretty sure they stopped advancing every year cause they were starting to approach smog laden years.
Overall, I'm a 240z fan. Yes, there was potential in the other models, but there's just something lacking. Mark's is the nicest 280 I've seen, and he did an incredible job on it, but I'm just not into them. That being said, finding a rust free and unmolested 240 is growing ever harder. If you just like the looks you should go with the 280, more of them out there, but the bumpers just make me wince!
