Notices
2003-2009 Nissan 350Z

Road & Track Sports Car Comparo

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-24-2005, 04:02 AM
  #41  
JDMFairlady21
New Member
iTrader: (9)
 
JDMFairlady21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: LI, NY
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

i second adamdc and rclab1 ideas. definitely would put the Z high up there in the performance sports coupe category.
Old 02-26-2005, 11:33 AM
  #42  
ShermanA
Registered User
 
ShermanA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

For the record, the article doesn't exactly say that the 350Z has "no low end torque." It says, on page 58, that "Nissan 350Z's 3.5-liter V-6 lacks the low end grunt of the base model." And, on page 63, Millen comments: "I was disappointed in the lack of grunt from the 350Z" when describing how it performed at turn 2 of Buttonwillow.

To me, they are lamenting the lack of torque of the "more powerful" engine when compared to the "standard" 287 hp version that most of us have.

Cheers,
Sherman
Old 02-26-2005, 12:28 PM
  #43  
Camel
Registered User
 
Camel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I seriously hope this place doesn't fall into the weak situation of people taking sides on the 300vs287hp thing. Let's face it, the performance difference between the 2 is so negligible to anyone other than a professional race car driver that it's laughable to even argue about it here. And most of us, while we like to think so, are not even close to a race car driver. I have driven 4 different models with the 287hp engine and my 35th has the 300hp version of course. Honestly, it's hard to tell a difference. At the drag strip, it would be a driver's race. Then again, to me this car is not about straight line #'s anyway, it's about the whole package. If all I cared about was straight line I'd have bought one of the last few '04 Cobras laying around.

All in all, the fact that the car was even placed in the same category as some of those others and didn't even come in last is enough for me. I only paid a little over $35k for it. *shrug*
Old 04-05-2005, 06:52 PM
  #44  
rodH
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
rodH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: coto de caza, ca
Posts: 3,319
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

interesting how some of the comments change when you add some little performance goodies onto the car (I guess this is why I am NOT stock?)
(btw this is a 287 hp version)

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=1985
Old 04-05-2005, 07:10 PM
  #45  
rodH
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
rodH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: coto de caza, ca
Posts: 3,319
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

I am wondering if the lower the torque, I think really effects the track speed, I remember reading a couple tests (still have the copies) where the Z beat the M3 SMG and a 911 with a sport wheel and package option. And another test where it beat the S2000 and the Mustang Billit (or was it a mach 1?) and audi TT. Now the Z has gone down in torque and he S has gone up and guess who won this time??? It has effected the track time too, imho (although I still think we haven't seen ENOUGH times yet to conclude that)


crap, I just looked at the data again in the article, they mentioned that it was a bad day or track?? I am NOT so sure, look at the S2000, Z4, Boxster S, 911, etc.....Times, they are amoung the BEST times I have seen for those cars. I am NOT sure I buy the track condition excuse.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
etkms
Engine & Drivetrain
29
06-19-2022 06:30 PM
aarrgghh
Forced Induction
15
05-01-2022 11:04 AM
JjL
East Canada
10
06-12-2019 03:04 AM
sales@czp
Suspension
54
01-17-2018 09:24 PM



Quick Reply: Road & Track Sports Car Comparo



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:57 PM.