i'm thinking the biggest complainers would be those in the Viper crowd...i mean it placed 6th behind (my beloved hehe) S2000....give me a break....who really thinks the S2000 is a better sports car than a Viper??? and i am very impressed with the SLK's lap time

 

If you are considering price, which is sounds like they did, I can see why the S2000 faired well. Remember, if you remove different levels of criteria (price, new model, etc.) in any car comparison if can drastically change the order of the included cars.

 

all this article proves to me is I need to make more money and get me a carrera S.....but even then the 997 GT3 will smoke it.....*sigh* such is life

 

hehe, funny you mention that. After reading raceboy's (I think thats right??) review of the new Boxster, I started to get the bug again to "upgrade" the ride. After looking at the price, I thought, well why don't I try and get a 2-3 year old 911 instead. Then I slapped myself back into reality...I'm fine again and will keep my Z.

 

In my opinion the best benchmark to see what a car is capable of doing on a track is when it's driven on the Nordschleife of the Nurburgring in Germany.
This track has no equal in the world because of it's lenght and diversity (13 miles in lenght, 300 meters difference between the lowest and the heighest point on the track and 147 corners).

As you can see on the link below the 350Z is a great car and the outcome is very different to the Road and Track magazine test. The 350Z tested on the Nordschleife was obviously a European spec model.
I drive the Nordschleife on a regular basis and I can tell you that the 350Z is very easy to drive hard there.

http://forums.renegadeent.com/showthread.php?t=154

Marco

 

while i agree that's a good track that'll test all of a cars dynamic characteristics, it's really hard to use those #'s as comparison metrics as those times are from different times, different drivers, different road conditions, etc.........at least this road and track one was (approx) the same time, same road conditions, etc.......this makes it almost as good a test as it can get in my eyes

 

Marco:

Good link, nice to look at the data. Regarding the R&T article. I felt they did a great job having Millen drive the cars and also providing times for each section of the track for each car so readers could see how each car performed in turns, straights etc. The R&T test is valid. Just because we own Z's and dont like the results does not eliminate the fact that it placed as it did.

All of these cars are excellent performers thus placing as the Z did is not that bad. The track they used has good variation thus the data is note worthy. If anything, the link you refered to is not comparing apples to apples in that different drivers were used and the times were recorded on different days.

Personally, I am not going to question Millen's driving ability and the track times are as accurate as can be expected of any test.

On another note, a viper and vette better beat the Z on a track or ortherwise, they would be really put to shame considering there cost. The Nissan engineers stated the Z would perform equal to the targeted competition being the Boxster (not Boxster S) and it has done that and lead the sales of all sport cars in America since its release. Nissan did more things right than wrong when designing the 350Z. I can live with my $30,000 350Z getting beat by a $80,000 Viper. The 350Z is respected enough to be compared to these high perfoming cars which is a compliment in its self.

 

Most times (about 80%) that are mentioned on the list are driven by two drivers, Horst von Saurma and Walther Rohrl. The lap times that are mentioned are driven on a dry track.

Horst von Saurma tests cars for "Sport Auto" magazine. I have a subscription to this magazine so I know that he drove the 350Z, BMW Z4, Porsche Boxster S, Subaru Impreza WRX STI, Porsche 911 (997), Porsche Carrera GT to name a few.

My point was that the good and bad points of a car are more likely to come out on the Nordschleife than the track that they used now.
I understand that the Nordschleife is not located in the USA and they have to test the cars somewhere. In my opinion a test using the whole track (configuration 13 mentioned on page 2) would have given a different picture between the 350Z, Boxster, S2000 and Z4.

I'm also very happy with the 350Z. The only thing that is slightly bothering me is that I paid € 51.000,- ($ 66.000,-) for it and not
$34.500 that a track model costs in the USA

Marco

 

Marco, thanks for telling us those drivers for those tests, makes the data seems more reliable. I bet if you selected 10 tracks and ran the same cars on those tracks, the results would vary. Cars like Vipers would certainly like less curves and love long straights where the HP could be used more effectively.

 

Why.... just get a Z and spend the savings on modding the hell out of it. My Z will destroy a Carerra S... hell, it's raced and beat a Ferrari 360 (of course, that was straight line. I'm sure the Ferrari would have more than made up for its loss by ruining my day at the track or top end... and it damn sure looks a lot sexier than a Z! )

Anyway, I guess my point is it depends on what you want. If you prefer to buy a car and have it be your total package. That is, you're not going to do anything with it but drive it, then this test is somewhat valid. I say somewhat because it only applies to people who could afford any car on the list.

If you have a budget or would prefer to get a less expensive car and personalize/make it better yourself, then I still say the best bets on that list are the Z and the S2000. For the price of any of the other cars in the comparison, you can build an absolutely insane Z or S2000 by focusing on performance and foregoing any frivilous mods.

 

Very cool that the Z is competitive in that league! Now if they took a V8 from the Titan, tweak it to 400 hp drop it in a Z with big rubber and, ... the mind boggles. GO Z!

 

watch this video, S2000 vs 350Z at Monza.

video

 

Hmm, $30,000 more for 4.54 seconds........Na, I'll keep the Z

 

I can afford any car on that list, and at this point, I wouldn't change the Z for any one of them.

I don't like the styling of the C6, the Viper has POS build quality, the "new" 911 looks ridiculous with it's dated, short wheelbase (God forbid Porsche should actually update the car), and none of the others appeal to me at all.

It's not all about decimal points. It's about how the car fits me, feels to me in street performance ( I don't track the car), styling and quality. I think the Z is still a performance bargain, and I love the styling.

I would consider the next Z06 (the styling tweaks improve it a bit) and AMV8 as future replacements, but that R & T test, although informative, does little to address the subjective impressions that sum up owning a car for longer than few days at the track.

 

isn't that the upcoming GT-R???

 

if i could afford a $100K sports car i'd pick up a 996 GT3 and be done with it.

 

Maybe its just the name porsche and the fact that they don't make mass production vehicles like the maxima or frontier.

Personally i think the porsche is the uglist car ever made and can't figure out what people see in them. If nissan didn't have the name and the mass cars behind them this car is one of the classiest out there.

If it wasn't for that i think nissan could easily get more horse and more money for the Z it truly is unique.

If i was given a porsche i'd trade it in buy a z and use the left over money for performance upgrades.

 

Your full of misinformation..... R&T back in 03' Tested a track model to 14.3 @ 98, Car and driver I think ran 14.2 @ 100. I dont remember what Motor Trend did back when the Z came out, but recenty they ran 13.77@101. If you look @ Motor Trend they have the fastest times on average(im sure their are a few exceptions).

Also the new Z doesnt redline 1000 rpm higher than 6600....It redlines at 7000 or 7100 rpm. I havent seen any dyno's for an 05' Track model, but I doubt they peak past 6300 rpm's, so shifting it that high at every gear change would not be beneficial for good times.....time will tell.

Concerning the article, Im not gonna sit here and make excuses on the Z, Im happy with it, even with Millen driving all these cars again on a different day the results could change-it doesnt mean anything to me. What I was surprised at was how well the MB did.

 

I owned a '95 911, and it was the most unreliable car I've ever had. I had a '93 300ZXTT at the same time, and the Z was a much better car on all fronts, and dead-on reliable. I dumped that 911 after a year. If going to spend that kind money on a sports car again, it won't be a Porsche.