vs. S2000.....Torque & Looks
vs. RX-8.......Torque & Looks
vs. STI.........Looks
vs. EVO........Looks
vs. Audi TT...Looks & HP
vs. Mustang GT...Looks & Reliability
vs. Porche Boxter...Looks & Price
vs. Mitsubishi Eclipse...HP, Torque & Reliability
vs. Dodge SRT-4....Looks, RWD, & Handling
vs. Maxima...Looks & Handling
vs. G35...Looks & Acceleration
vs. Ferrari...Price

 

i hate to say the interior of Z is so crappy.

 

For me it was looks.

I looked at every two seater sold in America, and a very select four seaters. Most were about 260-300 horse power which is fast enough as the car is going to spend more time in bumper-to-bumper LA traffic than on the track. The four finalist were:

Porsche's Boxster S and Carrera 911 (996)
Audi TT
Nissan 350Z

The Carerra and 350Z were my two final choices, one cost twice as much as the other and to be honest, the Porsche has lost some of the pre-1999 curves she had. The Nissan looked more like a classic Carerra than the Porsche did.

 

I love my Z.

But it's not the "best" car out there. Road and Track really trashed the Z a couple of months ago (March 2005).

In the end, I was deciding between the Z and a BMW 645Ci, but for that amount of cash (70-80g's ) with a 325hp engine and only a 5.3s 0 to 60, I figured a Track Z could match it.

I also debated waiting until early 2006 for the Cayman S. At 295hp, the output was close, but the midengine design, weight, and track times at Nurburgring made it superior. This car is going to be a formidable weapon. But I didn't want to wait that long (and spend the extra 20g's ), and Porsche reliability might become an issue in the future.

So in the end, it was the Z for me. I fell in love with its curves and the design.

Stylistically, by the way, these 3 cars are similar, and so maybe I'm just superficial because I'm a sucker for looks.

 

it aint that crappy, its average

the srt-4 interior is crappy, looks like it needs more (a lot more) in there

and how about C5 Vettes?

its really not bad, i agree they could've done much better, but at least its not ugly like the other two. the seats and the steering wheel and the trunk are the best parts i think.

 

And looks...

 

are you talking 987 or 986 boxster? price you can't argue with but the 987s look stunning.

 

subjective... we dont need threads like this

 

lol

You can basically say the EXACT same thing for every one of these cars (In other words, say that they are superior to the Z)

Love my Z, but this thread is pretty demb...lol

 

> vs. Mustang GT...Looks & Reliability

This is not a valid point. Looks are subjective vs new Stang. Reliability of 03-04 Z is questionable and subjective, I have things failing on and off. My last US-made car was more reliable. The above statement is an antiquated stereotype and no longer applies.

 

I can agree with those, but there are so many Z's driving around now for those very reasons. I think the 350Z has lost a lot of its "touch".

 

+1

Just looking to see how many trolls there are.

 

That's what modding is for! There isn't a Z on the roads that looks like mine, and few cars that turn heads like it does either, unless you cross WAY over the 100K threshhold. Not trying to sound arrogant here, but a car is what you make it.

 

+1.

 

i don't see whats wrong with the Z's interior, its just plain and simple, plastic and guages, no BS, look at the evo's interior.... plain and simple too, but dayaaam

 

The Z is great for it's price, but c'mon now....

It's a fun car to drive, but don't kid yourself, it's nowhere near superior to everything.

 

Nissan hit a nice little niche with the 350z... good bang for the buck. Good looks... good torque, hp, etc.


Is it the bestest car evarRR?RR!!!!?!111

no.

 

Z > all, huh?

It's a nice car no doubt, but I find fault with your list.

 

At least the Z completely spanks the BMW Z4 and Audi TT, in terms of performance and price.

 

Yeah...I'm sure alot of z owners here are going to have to disagree with your list....