Actually, Road & Track and Car & Driver have the best times...

Just the extra 1000rpm alone will improve 1/4 times. The extra hp helps too.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Skrill
[B]Hmm, maybe it was the extra weight of the 35th -- but this article from R&T finds the car to be a good match against a 911 Targa and an M3 SMG.

Besides the weight of the leather seats what else is making the 35th (3,299) weigh more than the track (3,225)? Mabey the rims?
And why is the auto weigh 8lbs less than the manual? Sorry for off topic...

 

ya, the carrera and the vette are the only two on that list; maybe the viper, which i would then sell and buy one of the other two.

 

I'm not talking strickly Z times. Your right, they did have a low time for the Z. But, for most cars they do get pretty good times.

 

Could it be a weak Z? Sounds a bit off or maybe the track had a lot to do with it.

 

You don`t sound like an a$$, I feel the same way. 287 horse is plenty for me, and I have no desire to be faster 0 to 60 or quicker around a corner.
I can remember when I got my Z, a few of the morons in my office said, "Oh this car is faster 0 to 60, that car is faster in the quarter. Why did`nt you get ones of those, there faster. Blah , blah." As they leave the office in their mini-vans.
Who cares. I love my Z and I could`nt be happier

 

Here is configuration No. 24:



Here is the configuration No. 13 that I have driven:

 

looks like configure 24 benefits the cars with the most hp.

 

Yeah -- if you are going clock-wise, I can exit riverside doing 85+. With the straight -- and not Lost Hills -- I would say you cold see 125 in our cars. In a Viper -- probably 140.

 

Great thread....thanks zland, skril, et al.!!!

 

man...I'd love to see how an NSX would stack up against these guys.

Its really Tuff to ignore the Vette - espec for the money.

I'll be buying an 02-03 NSX when the right color combo turns up. Took me months to leave the porsche camp, but damn that Pesky Vette...

 

Skrill, do you think the Z could've done better?

I don't understand why the Z did so badly? i was expecting it to be ahead of the z4, s2000, and maybe the new boxter-s

p.s.
isn't Steve Millen the guy that owns Stillen?

 

Yeah the last 3 years of production C-5 ZO-6's are the vettes to have as for bang for the buck performance. I would be tempted away from the Z.

 

Steve Millen = Stillen. He was a former Nissan factory racer.

As for if the Z could do better -- I don't really know. The stock Z is saddled with crap tires and that is the biggest issue. Given what R&T got out of the car at Big Willow -- the answer is probably (Big Willow has some enormous fast straights and very high speed sweepers).

To be honest -- the car is pretty equal to the Z4, S2k, Boxter, etc. If you go to a track driving event you will see that driver experience and skill is the most important factor to speed. But the second is weight and third tires (not hp, or crazy suspension -- but tires). I would bet that the Boxster, Z4 and S2k all come better tires (and bigger wider tires in the case of the Z4 and Boxter). And the S2k and Elise are so much lighter -- it is not surprising to me that they outperform a Z.

 

Wait a minute guys... I think we're missing something really important here. Let me put it this way: If your [wife, girlfriend, sig. other] comes in 8th runner-up in a national beauty contest, is she now a "dog?"

I think there's more to our love affair with the Z than its ranking among a group of subjectively selected "sportscars." There a many attributes to the Z that can't be measured with a stopwatch: the look, the sound, the feel. And what about all of the highly regarded cars that didn't make the list; like the EVO, RX-8,TT, et. al.

Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young couldn't said it any better 35 years ago..."Love the one your with." By any measure, we all should be proud Z enthusiasts

 

i think the z would have been really competitive with the "big boys" if they were running at "streets of willow" instead of the small track at "buttonwillow."

 

Yeah, I would have expected the Z to have had a better showing. But, my point is that even though it didn't, it's OK. It's less important what others opinions are. We know what we value and why. I think it's only if I go to the racetrack that I need to win. And it's cool enough knowing that my Z could beat most cars with a sticker price of under $80k.

 

Very interesting article. I am reminded of this summer when I was in the market for a new car and ended up getting a 2004 Performance Coupe. Some of the cars listed above were on my short list, but when I made my decision I got the best car I could afford that filled my requirements. 1 - Rear wheel drive, 2 - Coupe (not convertible), 3 - Manual transmission. On the above list the only other cars that fits that critera are the Porsche, and the Corvette, both of which I aspire to own someday. As it was said earlier it is interesting to note that the 350z's main competitors did not join it in the test, as it was predominantly up against the "big boys". In fact, all but these three are convertibles. I wonder if the intention of the article was to compare drop top sports cars, since all are available in convertible form.