RT comparison - bad tires
02-04-2005, 08:40 PM
#1
Site Sponsor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RT comparison - bad tires
I was reading the R and T comparison of sports cars, and it was a very interesting article. Whether or not the Z deserved a low rating or if you're in agreement is the topic of another thread. I just have to mention though, that to me, the data in this article reveals something very interesting that all of us have known for a while.
I think the biggest factor in inhibiting the Z's full acceleration and corning potential are the STOCK TIRES!
Look at the 0-20 mph numbers!!, it is very revealing that the Z is MUCH slower to 20mph than any of these cars (0.3 sec or more).
Cars with much less HP and torque are getting much better times. Sounds to me like a traction problem. The same traction problem that would affect cornering speeds as well!
Sure, if the Z came stock with a NISMO suspension, it would be a much better track car and there are many other factors you can change as well, but that would no longe rmake it a "stock" Z. Like I said, I think the obvious and most apparant flaw in the stock offering on the Z are the tires.
If only Nissan offered OEM tires as S03's or Pilot sports, I think the effect would be significant enough that you would have seen noticably better acceleration numbers and lap times.
RaymanZ
I think the biggest factor in inhibiting the Z's full acceleration and corning potential are the STOCK TIRES!
Look at the 0-20 mph numbers!!, it is very revealing that the Z is MUCH slower to 20mph than any of these cars (0.3 sec or more).
Cars with much less HP and torque are getting much better times. Sounds to me like a traction problem. The same traction problem that would affect cornering speeds as well!
Sure, if the Z came stock with a NISMO suspension, it would be a much better track car and there are many other factors you can change as well, but that would no longe rmake it a "stock" Z. Like I said, I think the obvious and most apparant flaw in the stock offering on the Z are the tires.
If only Nissan offered OEM tires as S03's or Pilot sports, I think the effect would be significant enough that you would have seen noticably better acceleration numbers and lap times.
RaymanZ
Last edited by raymanZ; 02-04-2005 at 08:44 PM.
02-04-2005, 08:48 PM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Del Rio, Texas
Posts: 790
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: RT comparison - bad tires
Originally posted by raymanZ
I was reading the R and T comparison of sports cars, and it was a very interesting article. Whether or not the Z deserved a low rating or if you're in agreement is the topic of another thread. I just have to mention though, that to me, the data in this article reveals something very interesting that all of us have known for a while.
I think the biggest factor in inhibiting the Z's full acceleration and corning potential are the STOCK TIRES!
Look at the 0-20 mph numbers!!, it is very revealing that the Z is MUCH slower to 20mph than any of these cars (0.3 sec or more).
Cars with much less HP and torque are getting much better times. Sounds to me like a traction problem. The same traction problem that would affect cornering speeds as well!
Sure, if the Z came stock with a NISMO suspension, it would be a much better track car and there are many other factors you can change as well, but that would no longe rmake it a "stock" Z. Like I said, I think the obvious and most apparant flaw in the stock offering on the Z are the tires.
If only Nissan offered OEM tires as S03's or Pilot sports, I think the effect would be significant enough that you would have seen noticably better acceleration numbers and lap times.
RaymanZ
I was reading the R and T comparison of sports cars, and it was a very interesting article. Whether or not the Z deserved a low rating or if you're in agreement is the topic of another thread. I just have to mention though, that to me, the data in this article reveals something very interesting that all of us have known for a while.
I think the biggest factor in inhibiting the Z's full acceleration and corning potential are the STOCK TIRES!
Look at the 0-20 mph numbers!!, it is very revealing that the Z is MUCH slower to 20mph than any of these cars (0.3 sec or more).
Cars with much less HP and torque are getting much better times. Sounds to me like a traction problem. The same traction problem that would affect cornering speeds as well!
Sure, if the Z came stock with a NISMO suspension, it would be a much better track car and there are many other factors you can change as well, but that would no longe rmake it a "stock" Z. Like I said, I think the obvious and most apparant flaw in the stock offering on the Z are the tires.
If only Nissan offered OEM tires as S03's or Pilot sports, I think the effect would be significant enough that you would have seen noticably better acceleration numbers and lap times.
RaymanZ
02-04-2005, 09:45 PM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UCLA
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Re: RT comparison - bad tires
Originally posted by UsafaRice
+1, damn Infinitis get Pilots...
+1, damn Infinitis get Pilots...
The SE-R Altimas get SO-3's, I saw when I was buying my car. I thought that was outrageous that my 37k Track model got crap tires, when ugly Altimas got better tires.
02-05-2005, 05:22 AM
#4
New Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: LV
Posts: 984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: RT comparison - bad tires
Couldn't agree more. The RE040 is the weak link in the 350Z package - they don't offer as much grip as other max performance tires..yet at the same time their sidewalls are too stiff (I've never made that complaint before!). Also, I've owned other summer performance tires...and none were as poor in rain and cold temps. Hell below 70 degrees these tires have no grip. Can't wait until I wear mine out and I can slap some appropriate rubber on this car.
NzZ
NzZ
02-05-2005, 05:03 PM
#7
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by zillinois
Here's the real test. Run the same tires on all of those cars and see where the Z comes out then.
Here's the real test. Run the same tires on all of those cars and see where the Z comes out then.
this is why these tests are absolutely meaningless
Z4 - Bridgestone potenza re050
C6 - GoodYear Eagle F1 Supercar
Viper - Michelin pilot sport
s2000 - Bridgestone potenza re050
Elise - Yokohama A048
SLK - Pirelli Pzero rosso
350z - Bridgestone potenza re040
Boxter - Michelin pilot sport
Carrera - Michelin pilot sport
Trending Topics
02-05-2005, 06:19 PM
#8
New Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: LV
Posts: 984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As much as I want to agree that the outcome would be different with different tires...the point of the study was stock cars. Not many people buy a brand new car and swap out the tires. Nissan should be ashamed of itself...they go and make a sports car and compromise all sorts of stuff (rear seats, ride quality, storage space w/the strut bar) in the name of handling...then go and slap the Craptenzas on it. Why even bother?
NzZ
NzZ
02-05-2005, 08:15 PM
#9
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Normal people don't run their cars on race tracks at 100% of their capabilities.
I do bring my car to the track, and I almost instantly bought a set of track rims and tires. IF you are serious about driving than you spend on tires and drivers courses, not on bling rice crap gizmos.
the RT test is for people who race with magazines.
I do bring my car to the track, and I almost instantly bought a set of track rims and tires. IF you are serious about driving than you spend on tires and drivers courses, not on bling rice crap gizmos.
the RT test is for people who race with magazines.
Last edited by Nano; 02-05-2005 at 08:23 PM.
02-06-2005, 05:29 AM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Woodstock, Ga
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, this is one of Road & Craps better comparison test articles!!! Maybe they are getting smarter.
Nissan has made the 350 Z too damn heavy for a sports car. Even the Vette is lighter with a much stronger engine & drive train. The test weight for the 350Z = 3560 lbs. and the Vette = 3480lbs.Trying to interchange the chassis & suspension from one brand and model to another... tends to cause the weight problem. Get the weight down to ~ 3100 lbs., see the Honda S2000, then the 350Z has a chance to compete!
02-08-2005, 09:17 AM
#12
I gotta agree with raymanZ. The single biggest factor in all the performance test that get run is the tire selection. I think we all agree that Nissan made a very poor OEM tire selection. I also feel that we all would have gladly paid $500 more for a better set of OEM rubber. That being said it is an OEM test, so I do feel it was fair.
02-08-2005, 08:03 PM
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by trumperZ06
Actually, this is one of Road & Craps better comparison test articles!!! Maybe they are getting smarter.
Nissan has made the 350 Z too damn heavy for a sports car. Even the Vette is lighter with a much stronger engine & drive train. The test weight for the 350Z = 3560 lbs. and the Vette = 3480lbs.
Trying to interchange the chassis & suspension from one brand and model to another... tends to cause the weight problem. Get the weight down to ~ 3100 lbs., see the Honda S2000, then the 350Z has a chance to compete!
Actually, this is one of Road & Craps better comparison test articles!!! Maybe they are getting smarter. Nissan has made the 350 Z too damn heavy for a sports car. Even the Vette is lighter with a much stronger engine & drive train. The test weight for the 350Z = 3560 lbs. and the Vette = 3480lbs.Trying to interchange the chassis & suspension from one brand and model to another... tends to cause the weight problem. Get the weight down to ~ 3100 lbs., see the Honda S2000, then the 350Z has a chance to compete!
02-08-2005, 08:04 PM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Nano
Normal people don't run their cars on race tracks at 100% of their capabilities.
I do bring my car to the track, and I almost instantly bought a set of track rims and tires. IF you are serious about driving than you spend on tires and drivers courses, not on bling rice crap gizmos.
the RT test is for people who race with magazines.
Normal people don't run their cars on race tracks at 100% of their capabilities.
I do bring my car to the track, and I almost instantly bought a set of track rims and tires. IF you are serious about driving than you spend on tires and drivers courses, not on bling rice crap gizmos.
the RT test is for people who race with magazines.
02-08-2005, 08:35 PM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Temecula, CA
Posts: 3,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by 510dat
that's 3250(full gas tank)+ driver + test equipment
that's 3250(full gas tank)+ driver + test equipment
Doesnt 3560 sound more like the roadster? Either way, the fact is that the Z got smoked. Factor in price though and it evens it out a little.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Tonyz_2004_350z
South East Marketplace
1
10-04-2015 12:53 PM