Is the 350Z really that FAST ??
12-18-2002, 06:23 AM
#41
Originally posted by digerydingo
Actualy it's not so much a problem on the heel toe, although an inconvinience of having to hold longer on the blip, but more of a problem with left foot braking. When you left foot brake you often begin to apply the brake while lifting off the throttle. This makes weight transfer much more smooth and linear. The car doesn't lurch down into braking, less of a nose dive, which in the long run translates to much more stability, better braking and shorter distances, espeicaly when you need to brake in a slight curve or into a long sweeper. Same on entry/apex when it's time to trasition from brake to gas it's much better to apply a nice smooth trasition to maintain the cars stability at the highest point of cornering G's. Having the throttle cut or allow max 20% throttle doesn't alow you to do this at all and inadvertantly promotes stab and steer.
I don't see why they need this system in place at all. All cars have allowed you to apply brake and throttle at the same time, and besides worn brakes and tires, I don't see how you could get into more trouble then you've ever been able to. Maybe somebody sued Nissan because he stepped on both pedals and crashed his car, or maybe we've reverted to the stone age. Either way I hear it's simple fuse to remove that kills this stellar, performance improving feature. That's the only way they could do the cover of SCC a few months back. Can't even do a bloody brake stand!
Actualy it's not so much a problem on the heel toe, although an inconvinience of having to hold longer on the blip, but more of a problem with left foot braking. When you left foot brake you often begin to apply the brake while lifting off the throttle. This makes weight transfer much more smooth and linear. The car doesn't lurch down into braking, less of a nose dive, which in the long run translates to much more stability, better braking and shorter distances, espeicaly when you need to brake in a slight curve or into a long sweeper. Same on entry/apex when it's time to trasition from brake to gas it's much better to apply a nice smooth trasition to maintain the cars stability at the highest point of cornering G's. Having the throttle cut or allow max 20% throttle doesn't alow you to do this at all and inadvertantly promotes stab and steer.
I don't see why they need this system in place at all. All cars have allowed you to apply brake and throttle at the same time, and besides worn brakes and tires, I don't see how you could get into more trouble then you've ever been able to. Maybe somebody sued Nissan because he stepped on both pedals and crashed his car, or maybe we've reverted to the stone age. Either way I hear it's simple fuse to remove that kills this stellar, performance improving feature. That's the only way they could do the cover of SCC a few months back. Can't even do a bloody brake stand!
12-18-2002, 06:40 AM
#42
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Sun Diego
Posts: 1,253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12-18-2002, 09:13 AM
#44
New Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Quad Cities
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by PeelBoy
Exactly right. The new M3, 996 and LS1 Z28's are all low 13 second cars with a decent driver. roberto: That later model Firebird you raced was most likely a V6 (Which runs some where in the 15's if I had to guess) unless it was a Formula. Correct me if I'm wrong guys.
Exactly right. The new M3, 996 and LS1 Z28's are all low 13 second cars with a decent driver. roberto: That later model Firebird you raced was most likely a V6 (Which runs some where in the 15's if I had to guess) unless it was a Formula. Correct me if I'm wrong guys.
So basically the 3.8L V6 model can run a low 15.. I know of an MFBA member in the 14s, with a few mods. The LS1 can and has ran slower than a 14 in the 1/4.. however when I was stock still running 14.1s down the track (Auto, car was 6 years old, had 74K on it) I couldn't keep up with an LS1 car to save my life. Slowest one I've personally seen was 13.5 @ 102mph. Automatic 1998 Camaro SS. As far as the F-body being overrated. It was never marketed as a sports car, a bently, or otherwise. Its a "muscle" or "pony car" not in the mood for that argument so take your pick. They are rated at ~305hp to 325hp at the CRANK. Many have dynoed with that at the wheels or more than that at the wheels. 98 Models usually saw right around 290hp~300hp at the wheels..2002 cars have dynoed more than 330hp at the wheels stock! Seriously an underrated car. Hell Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords ran a high 12 pass, followed up by another high 12 pass in a 2000? or 2001 SS.
12-18-2002, 09:31 AM
#45
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Folsom, CA
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by S8ER95Z
The Base Firebird is very had to tell apart from the rest. Unless its a TransAm with RamAir, sometimes I have a hard time telling a difference. The Formula is the TransAm without all the weight So basically the 3.8L V6 model can run a low 15.. I know of an MFBA member in the 14s, with a few mods. The LS1 can and has ran slower than a 14 in the 1/4.. however when I was stock still running 14.1s down the track (Auto, car was 6 years old, had 74K on it) I couldn't keep up with an LS1 car to save my life. Slowest one I've personally seen was 13.5 @ 102mph. Automatic 1998 Camaro SS.
As far as the F-body being overrated. It was never marketed as a sports car, a bently, or otherwise. Its a "muscle" or "pony car" not in the mood for that argument so take your pick. They are rated at ~305hp to 325hp at the CRANK. Many have dynoed with that at the wheels or more than that at the wheels. 98 Models usually saw right around 290hp~300hp at the wheels..2002 cars have dynoed more than 330hp at the wheels stock! Seriously an underrated car. Hell Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords ran a high 12 pass, followed up by another high 12 pass in a 2000? or 2001 SS.
The Base Firebird is very had to tell apart from the rest. Unless its a TransAm with RamAir, sometimes I have a hard time telling a difference. The Formula is the TransAm without all the weight
So basically the 3.8L V6 model can run a low 15.. I know of an MFBA member in the 14s, with a few mods. The LS1 can and has ran slower than a 14 in the 1/4.. however when I was stock still running 14.1s down the track (Auto, car was 6 years old, had 74K on it) I couldn't keep up with an LS1 car to save my life. Slowest one I've personally seen was 13.5 @ 102mph. Automatic 1998 Camaro SS. As far as the F-body being overrated. It was never marketed as a sports car, a bently, or otherwise. Its a "muscle" or "pony car" not in the mood for that argument so take your pick. They are rated at ~305hp to 325hp at the CRANK. Many have dynoed with that at the wheels or more than that at the wheels. 98 Models usually saw right around 290hp~300hp at the wheels..2002 cars have dynoed more than 330hp at the wheels stock! Seriously an underrated car. Hell Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords ran a high 12 pass, followed up by another high 12 pass in a 2000? or 2001 SS.
If I am reading this correctly, than I just validated my Z28 comments cause I have never reffered to a LS1 or SS, I know they are fast as $h!t. My refference was to the Z28 (non-SS).
Perhaps I wasn't clear.
As for being overrated you are correct, they have never been marketed as a sports car. That does not keep people from viewing them as sports cars however, and as a "sports car" they are overrated by most. As a muscle car, the SS in my opinion is fabulous. The Z28 however, leaves much to be desired but is nice for the price.
Last edited by sdpearso; 12-18-2002 at 09:37 AM.
12-18-2002, 09:48 AM
#46
New Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Quad Cities
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by sdpearso
So am I reading this correctly? LS1 is the Camaro SS? Is the LT1 a plain Z28?
If I am reading this correctly, than I just validated my Z28 comments cause I have never reffered to a LS1 or SS, I know they are fast as $h!t. My refference was to the Z28 (non-SS).
Perhaps I wasn't clear.
As for being overrated you are correct, they have never been marketed as a sports car. That does not keep people from viewing them as sports cars however, and as a "sports car" they are overrated by most. As a muscle car, the SS in my opinion is fabulous. The Z28 however, leaves much to be desired but is nice for the price.
So am I reading this correctly? LS1 is the Camaro SS? Is the LT1 a plain Z28?
If I am reading this correctly, than I just validated my Z28 comments cause I have never reffered to a LS1 or SS, I know they are fast as $h!t. My refference was to the Z28 (non-SS).
Perhaps I wasn't clear.
As for being overrated you are correct, they have never been marketed as a sports car. That does not keep people from viewing them as sports cars however, and as a "sports car" they are overrated by most. As a muscle car, the SS in my opinion is fabulous. The Z28 however, leaves much to be desired but is nice for the price.
1993 ~ 1997 - LT1
1998 ~ 2002 - LS1
The Z28 is just as fast as the SS..we just dont get any credit. LOL
Honestly the ONLY difference between the SS and Z28? Hood, Rims, Exhaust. I believe there is a minor suspension upgrade as well. Maybe an optional one not postive. However thats it.
12-22-2002, 08:57 PM
#47
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Ohio350z
I would rather have my $30k car with $7-10k in mods (stereo, rims, brakes, turbo) than a stock $37-$45 BMW M5.
I would rather have my $30k car with $7-10k in mods (stereo, rims, brakes, turbo) than a stock $37-$45 BMW M5.
12-22-2002, 11:55 PM
#48
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,087
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by SiGGy
hahaha
those are all low 13 second cars accept the boxster S.
:P keep dreaming. Maybe beat a bad driver. But you wont be beating the car.
hahaha
those are all low 13 second cars accept the boxster S.
:P keep dreaming. Maybe beat a bad driver. But you wont be beating the car.
12-23-2002, 03:54 AM
#49
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MATIX
just a sidenote....my friends mcoupe was beaten by a z on the freeway in straight acceleration...i belive theyr slower than normal m3's
just a sidenote....my friends mcoupe was beaten by a z on the freeway in straight acceleration...i belive theyr slower than normal m3's
Here's my impression of the Z so far: The straight line performance is so so, definitely not the feeling of a low 5sec car. Some of it is probably the linear nature of the throttle response and power curve etc. but the rest of it is the weight of the car and the spool up time of the motor.
However, I can say that I'm impressed with the way this car shoots out of corners like a Jackrabbit on Speed. The motor is much more useful when starting off from 3k-4k rpm. I can see why the car does so well on the track compared with other performance cars. For faster lap times, corner exit speed is more important than corner entry speed.
Fly
Last edited by Flyingscot; 12-23-2002 at 04:53 AM.
12-23-2002, 05:55 AM
#50
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Denver
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only the new E46 M3 is faster.
A stock M roadster has run a 12.556 1/4 mile -- and numerous other coupes and roadsters are in the high 12's / low 13's stock.
On a side note -- the 99-00 M coupe and roadsters are also quicker than their E36M3 comparitives -- and have run as quick as 13.4's stock. We have yet to see a 350 do that.
The issue for most however is picking the M's apart from the regular Z3 coupes -- to most folks they look the same, and I have met one guy who tried to pass his regular Z3 coupe off as an M. Sad.
Last edited by steve c; 12-23-2002 at 05:58 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
wanderingstuden
Maintenance & Repair
6
01-28-2016 07:03 PM
Justin100
Intake Exhaust
26
11-29-2015 03:58 PM
