0-60 2006 350Z Times
I think anything sub 6 is fast enough for RWD. I'm pretty sure that's what nissan was thinking too when they first announced the Z's 0-60mph as under 6 seconds.
A 0-60 time quoted by a third party doesn't mean much down to the tenth. There are many factors and variables that will affect your launch, traction, etc. Just knowing that the Z is sub 6 should tell you all you need to know.
A 0-60 time quoted by a third party doesn't mean much down to the tenth. There are many factors and variables that will affect your launch, traction, etc. Just knowing that the Z is sub 6 should tell you all you need to know.
Last edited by roast; Jan 14, 2006 at 08:31 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
From: Pennsylvania
Originally Posted by samw1978
no offense, but... gotta tell you, RSX-S is no comparison.. I've raced my friend's several times
+1. I've had type S's instigate me more often than not, and they always get my tail lights. It's a nice car anyhow, i had a 99 integra and love Acura's.
Originally Posted by roast
I think anything sub 6 is fast enough for RWD. I'm pretty sure that's what nissan was thinking too when they first announced the Z's 0-60mph as under 6 seconds.
A 0-60 time quoted by a third party doesn't mean much down to the tenth. There are many factors and variables that will affect your launch, traction, etc. Just knowing that the Z is sub 6 should tell you all you need to know.
A 0-60 time quoted by a third party doesn't mean much down to the tenth. There are many factors and variables that will affect your launch, traction, etc. Just knowing that the Z is sub 6 should tell you all you need to know.
Dont always believe some of the reported times.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
From: New York
Originally Posted by mc350z
ive always wondered the process myself. how many runs to they do for a car. i mean do they hop in the car and run it a couple times and say ok that'll work. or do they run the hell out of the car until they get a good time? because its all about the launch and as people who do any kind of drag know launches can vary alot from time to time
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
From: New York
Originally Posted by mc350z
personally i have to raise the bar to a 5.5 or lower car as being good.
IMO a 6 sec 0-60 car puts you in a category with lesser cars you really dont want to be in
IMO a 6 sec 0-60 car puts you in a category with lesser cars you really dont want to be in
Guest
Posts: n/a
not only that a true performace car must be 4.9 or better. (hopefully the next gen Z should set a 4.5-.4.6 for its goal.)
but a 5.5 well rounded sports car is fine for its purpose no complaints
once again IMO a 6+ second car is "sporty" not a sports car.
o have always felt the 350Z sorta had an identity crisis so to say. it wants to be associated with porsche, corvette, M3 and that pedigree of cars but its not quite there its right there at the edge. it tends to get lumped into this RSX ,Srt-4, etc kind of category of car instead. its affordability is a double edge sword. its what has made the car so popular but you combine that with some mediocre times for instance like what edmunds reported on the 2006. and it just gets looked at in a different way than it should.
the 350z is a great car but its right on the border hopefully the next gen will push it over the top and and the 0-60 is a great benchmark to do that. it desperately needs a sub 5 second 0-60
but a 5.5 well rounded sports car is fine for its purpose no complaints
once again IMO a 6+ second car is "sporty" not a sports car.
o have always felt the 350Z sorta had an identity crisis so to say. it wants to be associated with porsche, corvette, M3 and that pedigree of cars but its not quite there its right there at the edge. it tends to get lumped into this RSX ,Srt-4, etc kind of category of car instead. its affordability is a double edge sword. its what has made the car so popular but you combine that with some mediocre times for instance like what edmunds reported on the 2006. and it just gets looked at in a different way than it should.
the 350z is a great car but its right on the border hopefully the next gen will push it over the top and and the 0-60 is a great benchmark to do that. it desperately needs a sub 5 second 0-60
Last edited by **; Jan 14, 2006 at 12:15 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
From: Long Island
Sports cars don't have to do 0-60 in less than 5 seconds. Maybe NEWER sports cars should but look at some of the #s of the early Zs and Porsches. They were very slow by todays standards but still very much sports cars. Sports cars shouldn't be measured by 0-60 and quarter mile times. They are made for Turning and handling although its nice to go fast in a straight line too. I would like to see a faster Z, but can mod mine if I want for sub 5 second 0-60 and low 13 second quarter times. I bet you slicks and some minor mods can get you at 5 second or less 0-60. anyone care to add?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by LIdrew
Sports cars don't have to do 0-60 in less than 5 seconds. Maybe NEWER sports cars should but look at some of the #s of the early Zs and Porsches. They were very slow by todays standards but still very much sports cars. Sports cars shouldn't be measured by 0-60 and quarter mile times. They are made for Turning and handling although its nice to go fast in a straight line too. I would like to see a faster Z, but can mod mine if I want for sub 5 second 0-60 and low 13 second quarter times. I bet you slicks and some minor mods can get you at 5 second or less 0-60. anyone care to add?
oh yeah thats what im talking about for NEWER sports cars. its a little different standards today. your absolutely right about those older cars being true sports cars. we just live in a era of new technology and the bar is a little higher
as for moding your car to do a sub 5 0-60. thats the thing, you can make an average sports cars a straight line beast in the aftermarket.
with just my nismo CAI /Exaust. and dropping my 275's S03's down to about 25PSI i think i did a 5.32 0-60
i think my automatic C6 did like a 4.4 if i remember correctly
Last edited by **; Jan 14, 2006 at 01:27 PM.
The bar can always stand to get raised. With the amount of time nissan spent on aerodynamics, the fact they added strut braces(a very offensive rear strut brace), and the fact they used a carbon fiber driveshaft and drive-by-wire throttle control, I'm going to guess nissan was focused on something other than standing starts.
The Z is not quite with those cars you listed, I agree. But it's right up there with them, more so than any other production car for the price. You're talking about major $$ differences there. You're comparing to a completely different financial bracket. What you pay for the Z and what you get is where the real value comes in. There is no other production car that I know of for the same price that will beat the Z around a road course. The evo and sti are the closest that come to mind and will no doubt win short straight races from digs. s2000, rx8 are further off the mark. z4 and boxter are too expensive and still won't win. Comparing the Z to an RSX or an srt-4 is nothing more than a downright silly joke, worthy of a good chuckle.
The Z is not quite with those cars you listed, I agree. But it's right up there with them, more so than any other production car for the price. You're talking about major $$ differences there. You're comparing to a completely different financial bracket. What you pay for the Z and what you get is where the real value comes in. There is no other production car that I know of for the same price that will beat the Z around a road course. The evo and sti are the closest that come to mind and will no doubt win short straight races from digs. s2000, rx8 are further off the mark. z4 and boxter are too expensive and still won't win. Comparing the Z to an RSX or an srt-4 is nothing more than a downright silly joke, worthy of a good chuckle.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by roast
The Z is not quite with those cars you listed, I agree. But it's right up there with them, more so than any other production car for the price. You're talking about major $$ differences there. You're comparing to a completely different financial bracket. What you pay for the Z and what you get is where the real value comes in. There is no other production car that I know of for the same price that will beat the Z around a road course. The evo and sti are the closest that come to mind and will no doubt win short straight races from digs. s2000, rx8 are further off the mark. z4 and boxter are too expensive and still won't win. Comparing the Z to an RSX or an srt-4 is nothing more than a downright silly joke, worthy of a good chuckle.
as most true car enthusiasts know 0-60 isnt everything. but its the most common and basic way your average person perceives a cars abilities.
its the car world's equalivent to "how much you bench"
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
From: Long Island
a sub 6 second 0-60 is better than 90% of the cars on the road. In the next few years however, it will be more like 80%. In the next few years, the Z will still be shining in the appearance category. It will be VERY tough to top this cars design and even in 10 years it will still look good. Very well rounded car. Yes the Z will need to become faster to keep up with the competition as the years go on, however if you TT your car it will be faster than 99.9% of cars in stock form even 10 years from now.
I'm right there with you. I wouldnt mind seeing a factory turbo package. With all the subtle differences in the numerous trim levels currently, you think they would have something that stands out a bit more than the anniversery edition. I think they were trying to avoid the same pitfalls of the 300zx. Having a turbo edition would be far from having the whole line depend on it. I seriously think nissan could do it if they wanted to, but the money is rolling in already. For some reason I don't see them making any significant changes anytime soon. 
lol...that was a good analogy btw..
lol...that was a good analogy btw..
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 735
Likes: 0
From: TX
Originally Posted by JunJTan
I test drove the new Si last week. that was a gread ride. it's better ride than rsx-s (just different badge). handle, quick and nice interior. compare to our Z, less money for certain value, but the down side is less torgue, however it can rev high rpm to compensate it.
Have fun
Originally Posted by D350Z10
man the stock 2006 is a dog..... The 04 manual any trim runs 0-60 in 5.3 and 1/4 mile at 13.7 I have done it my self at the track and read in magazines.
whats the advantage other than "newest" and warranty?
it weighs more..
costs more
more HP yet offset by LESS Torque
slower times,
less MPG
any of the new cosmetic upgrades can be easily put on the older ones..
lights/ interior pieces/
essentialy it the same as the old ones??
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
From: Tampa Floirda
I had a 2003 RSX-S, tranny caused me to lemon it.
then I had a 2004 SRT-4 with full bolt-ons, man that was a fast car, from a roll.
Now i got my 2006 350z Enthusiast 6 Speed and I think its the best car I have owned so far. Before my RSX-S I had a 2002.5 Infiniti Qx4, so its not like all I have had so far are econo boxes =P
Edit - also dont forget that the stock tires arent exactly the best...
then I had a 2004 SRT-4 with full bolt-ons, man that was a fast car, from a roll.
Now i got my 2006 350z Enthusiast 6 Speed and I think its the best car I have owned so far. Before my RSX-S I had a 2002.5 Infiniti Qx4, so its not like all I have had so far are econo boxes =P
Edit - also dont forget that the stock tires arent exactly the best...
Last edited by En-GLaived; Jan 17, 2006 at 02:56 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
5.93 doesnt dound right, maybe they couldnt get any traction when they launched. I have these times:
2003 Nissan 350z 5.4 14.1
2004 Nissan 350z Roadster 5.7 14.3
2004 Nissan 350Z 5.3 13.77 (M.T. Mar '04)
2005 Nissan 350Z 35th Anniversary Edition 6 Speed 5.8 14.3
http://www.albeedigital.com/supercou...0-60times.html
2003 Nissan 350z 5.4 14.1
2004 Nissan 350z Roadster 5.7 14.3
2004 Nissan 350Z 5.3 13.77 (M.T. Mar '04)
2005 Nissan 350Z 35th Anniversary Edition 6 Speed 5.8 14.3
http://www.albeedigital.com/supercou...0-60times.html