Two That Didn’t Make The Cut: 1981 Datsun 280ZX vs 1985 Renault Encore

Good morning! Well, now that we’re done with the alphabet, I guess I’m going to run out the week with stuff I just think is neat, starting with one car I didn’t choose for the alphabet game, and one I probably would have if it had been available at the time.

Well, one thing is abundantly clear from yesterday: neoclassics are not favorites around here. They seem to be a love-it-or-hate-it thing. I know I’m not a fan, and neither are eighty percent of you. The little Honda Z won this round handily. Big thanks again to SWG for bringing it to my attention.

Our household was split: my wife took one look at the Zimmer and fell in love, while I wouldn’t touch it with a ten-foot pole. I don’t think she even looked at the Honda twice, whereas I would happily bomb around in it. Oh, and by the way, you couldn’t get a Honda Z with a manual. They were strictly automatics. It is, however, the same drivetrain as a Honda Acty van, and those were available with a manual, so theoretically a swap should be possible.

All right; let’s take a look at what might have been. One of these cars was briefly in the running for the letter Z, and another would have been a better choice for one R car, but it wasn’t yet for sale. Here they are.

1981 Datsun 280ZX Turbo – $8,000

Engine/drivetrain: Turbocharged 2.8-liter overhead cam inline 6, three-speed automatic, RWD

Location: Henderson, NV

Odometer reading: 190,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives well

Datsun’s original Z car was an instant legend, with its torquey inline six and zippy handling. Its successor, this car, has never commanded the same respect. Maybe it’s because it’s bigger and softer, more tuned for comfort than handling. Maybe it’s because of the way its drivers were portrayed in movies and music videos. Whatever the reason, the 280ZX spent years as an also-ran, playing second fiddle to Z cars both older and newer. But now, it seems, the remaining good ones are getting their due.

The 280ZX could be had with either a naturally-aspirated inline six or this turbocharged version, putting out 180 horsepower, which was pretty serious for the time. In fact, a Corvette of the same year only boasted 190, and it weighed five hundred pounds more. Unfortunately, the original buyer of this one opted for an automatic, which in 1981 meant only three forward gears, and a mushy torque converter that saps a lot of the fun. It does run well, however, and the seller says it has been daily driven.

It’s really nice inside, and I think the seats may have been reupholstered. They look just a little bit nicer than everything else. These were available with T-tops; this one doesn’t have them. Whether that’s a positive or a negative depends on your opinion of T-tops, I suppose. At least it’s the much better-proportioned two-seat version, instead of the awkward 2+2.

Outside, it’s nice at first glance, but there are a couple areas of concern. One is the strip of what looks like primer-gray on the roof. I have no idea what’s going on there, but you’d be wise to ask about it. The other is what looks like overspray on the rear plastic bumper, though it could just be faded black plastic. At least it’s rust-free, and still has all four of those wonderful snowflake-style wheels.

1985 Renault Encore – $3,000

Engine/drivetrain: 1.4-liter overhead valve inline 4, five-speed manual, FWD

Location: Derry, NH

Odometer reading: 83,000 miles

Operational status: Runs and drives, but needs a little work

AMC was in big trouble in the late 1970s. It had Jeep, and a whole lot of ten-year-old car designs with twenty-year-old engines that were reliable, but increasingly outclassed. AMC partnered with Renault to help gain back the small-car ground it once dominated, and the two companies co-designed a small sedan called the Alliance, followed a year later by this car, the Encore, basically the same thing with a hatchback.

Renault supplied the engines for the Alliance and Encore, and originally, they weren’t any more modern than AMC’s own sixes. The base engine, which this car has, is Renault’s venerable Cléon-Fonte pushrod four-cylinder, which dates all the way back to 1962. Here it displaces 1.4 liters, puts out 64 horsepower, and drives the front wheels through a five-speed manual gearbox. It runs and drives, and has had a bunch of recent work done, but the ad mentions something about a brake line needing to be replaced. But the brakes are new, which is confusing. Why do the brakes and not replace a leaking line? Something doesn’t add up.

AMC’s Dick Teague designed the interior for the Alliance and Encore, and if you’re familiar with AMC interior designs, you can tell. These seats are also mighty comfortable, by the way, which combined with a typical French soft suspension makes for a nicer ride than a lot of small cars. It looks really nice, but the driver’s seat being covered up is a bit concerning. It might be fine under there, but if so, why not let us see?

It looks clean on the outside too, and a couple of undercarriage photos in the ad show it’s rust-free underneath. This is the nicest Encore I’ve seen in many years, actually. It would certainly be a hit at any car gathering with folks old enough to recognize it.

I’ve been trying to come up with a common thread between these two to justify putting them together, and I just can’t … no, wait! They’re both hatchbacks! There, I knew I’d figure out something. So what’ll it be: the Japanese sports car gone soft, or the Franco-American economy car?