I was just curious how you all felt about this...do you guys who HAVE the car, and driven it, feel it can truely be driven aggressivly and is a true sports car? Or do you think as much power as it has, it's more of a "all show and no go" car?

Personally, I haven't "tested" it yet, since I'm only at 650 miles, but I do feel it has power, but not sure how much, and how well it would handle tight turns at different speeds.

 

If the 350Z isn't a sports car then I guess I don't know the definition of a sports car.

Fast Acceleration
Great handling
2 seats

What else is there?

 

My Z handles great. Pretty good acceleration from zero to heat pounding fun, and has the curves to turn heads.

i'm either talking about a hot girl, or a sports car.

seats two.

hmm.. still pondering... girl or sports car?

has a stick.


definately sports car now.

 

Z a sports car???? No way. Isn't it a truck?

 

Not just a truck, I thought it was a 18 wheeler, are you telling me it's not?

 

Its whatever S2000 is.

but Ill tell ya, insurance companies are hell bent on making it a sports car, tho I wouldnt mind if it wasnt.

 

Yes it is....it just does everything in such a composed maner, you dont get that edgy feeling you get with some sports cars. The Z can be taken up to some impresive limits, if you trust the car to. Its by no means bland or no fun, which it certainly isnt, but its done in a more refined manner. Again, its price forces it to make some comprimises. Engineers spent alot of time and materials making the chasis as rigid as possible, therby making tha handlng much much better. This though adds alot of weight...Nissan did as much in their power to fight this (aluminum suspension peices, engine and hood, minimalist interior), but still its no light at 3200lbs. If Nissan had placed this up a catigory, I thnk you could expect anall aluminum body. Others such as better tires (!), or a more agressive ECU. But what it boils down to is that the car as all of the "hard to fix" essesniosls in place. The ergonomics, the steering feel pedal operation, eye line ect...things that arnt really measurable but definately felt in well thought out sports cars.

 

I love how FAST you can take corners. Its just got so much grip.

Yeah the power is DEFINTELY there.

However, I lopve how much feedback you get through the tranny - even though its buttery smooth, you still get a fair amt of vibration when you hold the shifter. Its only at certain rpms too. really makes you feel like you're driving an exotic.

Also the exhaust note is really special.

I must say that for such a well designed japanese car, they still had time to design some *character* into it. Something sorely missing in my 97 prelude....

 

Does a bear truely **** in the woods?

Steve

 

Yeah, i think some people just look at numbers, price, and hear thats its a very drivable car and automaticaly label it soft, gt criuser, or simply "not a sports car". Well, i have to agree that the car has emotion. Its the kind of car that surpises you when you nail that apex, not when you read the spec sheet. I wouldnt call it a gt cruiser, but more of a everyday sports car. A gt cruiser is a car that pleases you when taking thay painfully slow ride to work, plush. but with some kick and composure. The Z can be anoying in the morning, with a cold gearbox, and the lugging engine thats just begging to be driven faster, but its liveable.

 

You're kidding, right? Of course it's a sports car. Here, this might help.

Sports car (spôrts kär) noun
An automobile equipped for racing, especially an aerodynamically shaped one-passenger or two-passenger vehicle with a high-powered engine, a low center of gravity and steering & suspension designed for precise control at high speeds.

 

Sports cars have long been seperated from other type of cars in that it had characteristics that make them different. Sports cars were built with one person in mind: the driver. It was meant to be driven, not carry passengers or loads. There was a time when sports cars carried a reputation of being expensive, raw, powerful and uncomfortable. And for a time, it was.

However, as time rolled on, the line between sports cars and passenger cars have diminished due in part to consumer demands and manufacturers supplying the needs of a targetted demographic.

These underlying circumstances have yielded luxury cars being supplied with more powerful engines that rival sports cars of old. And in turn, sports cars manufactured with luxurious ammenities that were once only found in sedans. Couple that with the latest and greatest technological advances and VOILA...you have a market full of consumers and manufacturers alike trying to decipher which cars fit under what category.

Which brings us to the question in this thread: "Is the Z trully a 'sports car'?"

Given the characteristics of what past sports cars possessed (ie: 2 seater, low profile, agility, supreme handling, speed, aerodynamics, power, etc.), I would resoundingly say, YES. The Z is indeed a sports car.

But then again, one's own opinion is only relative to that of another's, isn't it?

So what happened to the cars that remained expensive, raw, powerful and uncomfortable? Well, as evolution would have it, they yielded its own share of the market that most automobile enthusiast earnestly yearn to shoot for: The Exotic Sportscar category.

 

this is what my dictionary said:

Sports car (spôrts kär) noun -- Z

 

When I had a Mustang GT, some people would refer to it as a sports car. I knew better

 

The S2000 is a roadster by definition and the Z is a true sports(but on the verge of being a GT) car. There are exact definitions to what class cars are in. What pillars a car has, seats, trunk or hatch, etc. come into play about the cars exact classification. And there are some subjective factors to consider like cargo space, power, weight, design, etc. I saw it on the C&D website or mag, forgot which one

But today the lines are blurred between sports car, sports sedan, GT, etc. So it all depends on your defintition.

 

The Mustang is exactly what its is, a GT car. But just barely.

 

Just a fun fact, most of the early sports cars were built off mundane sedan chassises, and were not powerful. The British sports cars which were within the reach of middle class Americans were very slow 0-60, and in the 1/4 mile. My 1965 TR4 went 0-60 in 10.5 seconds and took 17.5 secs to reach the 1/4 mile. A lot of sedans were much faster, the biggest difference sports cars were noted for was they could be driven fast around corners, much faster than their wallowing sedan forebears.

My TR4 was faster than the hallowed and much prized Porsche 356, but cost over a $1K less at $3295. The biggest reason why the TR4 was faster, it derived from a 4 cylinder Tractor engine and had big Torque for a sports car of its day. Of course it was slower than the Jaguar XKE, which cost over $7000 and had a race-derived straight 6. The XKE introduced America to the really fast European sports cars which were derived from racing and created the exotic car market. Oh, btw, the TR4 was faster than the MGs too. I forgot to tell you abot the time we were traveling cross country in it. It started running rough and I pulled over to check under the hood. The first 2 sparkplug wires had vibrated off, i re-connected them and we continued our trip.

Boomer babble

 

The 350z I just drove home probably would never be labled "soft" by anyone I know.

It drives like a sports car, looks like a sports car and is called a sports car by people who write about them all the time. I think it is official. The question would be better suited against the G35 coupe that I test drove a couple of weeks ago. Sport car or Sports coupe? hmmmm, tough...

It is NOT a "sporty" car like similar front wheel drive wannabe's. I don't care what anyone says. If the car is not pushed by the rear wheels or does not have power to all 4 of them then it is not worthy of a "sports car" title.

 

Well, I'll probably get flamed like crazy, but in stock form the Z is more a GT car than a true sports car. The good new is that there really is only one thing pushing the Z over the sportscar line and into GT territory; the suspension (more plow than a farm) that seems like it was designed by lawyers and not the engineers. It's quite frustrating actually. So what is the good news? That you can fix the problem for under $2K, but how come Honda can do it stock? Oh well, I would rather spend the 2K (full Nismo suspension is on a plane to me from Japan as I write this) and have way more over all car than the S2K. Full write up soon to follow.

 

I gues you can have the US Auto Press to blame about the understeer....when the G35 came out, they complained it oversteered too much...