Shallow fans...
02-02-2003, 10:35 PM
#1
New Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Los Flores...Mostly...
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shallow fans...
02-03-2003, 04:31 AM
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
well, according to the post written by a 14 year old kid who doesnt even have a car, we arent true enthusiasts because we purchased a car from a company that copies Detroit's designs. 
why does he say this? mostly because he doesnt understand the way the auto industry works. Nissan is one of the most respected automobile companies with engineers that are obviously leaps and bounds ahead of many other companies. They have done their homework for the Z and it is one of the most over enginereed and best built japanese sports cars that is currently available. who made the skyline that has set standards around the world? Nissan. who made the original Z car that revolutionized the japanese sports car before Mazda even had a chance to catch up? Nissan (Datsun at the time). Mazda has been trying to get the rotary engine to work for more than 50 years, yes, thats right. if you have read an article on Mazda's rotary engine, you would have learned that it had first been developed after the second world war. but anyway, back to the point, Nissan did not build the 350z to compete with the Mustang GT as this kid gives an example of, the 350z is an enthusiasts machine, one that was built for the driver. i could go on forever, but the point is that the 350z is exatly opposite of what this kid said. so we wont worry about competition from the RX-8 because they will be sitting by the side of the road with blown motors. enjoy the roads and be safe out there, 
why does he say this? mostly because he doesnt understand the way the auto industry works. Nissan is one of the most respected automobile companies with engineers that are obviously leaps and bounds ahead of many other companies. They have done their homework for the Z and it is one of the most over enginereed and best built japanese sports cars that is currently available. who made the skyline that has set standards around the world? Nissan. who made the original Z car that revolutionized the japanese sports car before Mazda even had a chance to catch up? Nissan (Datsun at the time). Mazda has been trying to get the rotary engine to work for more than 50 years, yes, thats right. if you have read an article on Mazda's rotary engine, you would have learned that it had first been developed after the second world war. but anyway, back to the point, Nissan did not build the 350z to compete with the Mustang GT as this kid gives an example of, the 350z is an enthusiasts machine, one that was built for the driver. i could go on forever, but the point is that the 350z is exatly opposite of what this kid said. so we wont worry about competition from the RX-8 because they will be sitting by the side of the road with blown motors. enjoy the roads and be safe out there,
02-03-2003, 06:37 AM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must say, after reading the responses from their "community", I am even more pleased with my decision to purchase a 350Z. I'm happier to associate myself with the likes of the people from this forum than I would with the likes of the people from that forum.
02-03-2003, 07:30 AM
#7
Registered User
Originally posted by 350zSpeedRacer
What kind of a moron thinks the Z runs the quarter in 16 seconds?!?!?!?!? Yeah, they must be true enthusiasts because they know SO MUCH more than I do.
What kind of a moron thinks the Z runs the quarter in 16 seconds?!?!?!?!? Yeah, they must be true enthusiasts because they know SO MUCH more than I do.
Trending Topics
02-03-2003, 07:32 AM
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 23,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote dumbass: "Sick of 350Z comparisons with RX-8
Ok, I havent been on this forum too long, infact i just joined today. Ive been reading alot of the threads and something has been bothering me, here is me venting.
Ok, the 350z seems like a great car. It has loads of power and its new. Once the novelty of the car wears out i think the car will pretty much blow. People havta realize that Nissan did not revive a cool concept, which the original Z was, instead they copied Detroit. Yeah, thats right, american cars, muscle cars no less. If you think about it, the 350Z is basically a japanese muscle car with very little flair or character.
Why is Japan copying Detroit? If you think about it, a Mustang GT will probably keep up with the 350Z, it'll probably beat it off the line too. Is it cooler because its japanese? Ford also has a limited edition Mustang that is cheaper than the Cobra, it sells for $28K and has 300+ horsepower, and alot more torque than the 350Z. Weight isnt really an issue since the 350Z is fairly bloated compared to other Japanese cars. I think theres too much hype about the car. Kudos to nissans marketing department for making a so so car into the most anticipated car in a long time. Comparisons with such cars as the SLK, S2000, audi TT, bmw 3 series are obserd, it must be compared to the Mustang of the late camaros of the world.
Unfortunately this car is going to outsell the RX-8 by leaps and bounds. Its sad fact is that most people swear that they know everything there is to know about cars, there are few true enthusiasts around. The guy that swears he knows everything will probably buy the 350Z, it fits that huge demographic perfectly. On the other hand the RX-8 might seem like the bastard son of the RX-7 and a saturn, but its and enthusiasts car, and the true car lover will probably seek out the RX-8. The market however is probably alot smaller than what everyone on this forum would like to believe.
Ok, heres my conclusion. The RX-8 is a cool idea, I love rotaries and the third gen rx7 is still my dream car, but i dont know how well the RX-8 will sell, even if i had the means, i dont think i would buy the car. Call me a pesimist, but i think the RX-8 is doomed for failure, and we'll probably never see a rotary car following the RX-8. I dont think the world is ready for the RX-8, i wish they would just make another RX-7 that would do what the 3rd gen did, give you true supercar performance at reasonable cost.
Tell me what you think"
First of all, he needs an education. "Obserd" being the clear identifier. lol
He even contradicts himself most obviously. He says that the "true car lover will probably seek out the RX-8" but then he later says he probably won't buy the car. I guess he's not a "true car lover". lol Am I wrong in understanding that he won't buy the RX-8 because it won't sell well? That seem to be his reasoning, but he blasts the 350Z as a car that will "outsell the RX-8 by leaps and bounds". I see some inconsistency there, but I might be mistaken.
My assessment? DUMBASS...
Oh, and what's with those other posts? The 350Z weighs 3400 lbs???? Since when? We run 16 sec. 1/4s? Since when???
Then there's the guy quoting SCC and not understanding that the quote he chose was a GOOD thing.
These guys are magazine racers who probably have never driven any of the cars they talk about, especially a Z. We all know the dealers aren't allowing test drives. These guys are just envious...
-Jon
Ok, I havent been on this forum too long, infact i just joined today. Ive been reading alot of the threads and something has been bothering me, here is me venting.
Ok, the 350z seems like a great car. It has loads of power and its new. Once the novelty of the car wears out i think the car will pretty much blow. People havta realize that Nissan did not revive a cool concept, which the original Z was, instead they copied Detroit. Yeah, thats right, american cars, muscle cars no less. If you think about it, the 350Z is basically a japanese muscle car with very little flair or character.
Why is Japan copying Detroit? If you think about it, a Mustang GT will probably keep up with the 350Z, it'll probably beat it off the line too. Is it cooler because its japanese? Ford also has a limited edition Mustang that is cheaper than the Cobra, it sells for $28K and has 300+ horsepower, and alot more torque than the 350Z. Weight isnt really an issue since the 350Z is fairly bloated compared to other Japanese cars. I think theres too much hype about the car. Kudos to nissans marketing department for making a so so car into the most anticipated car in a long time. Comparisons with such cars as the SLK, S2000, audi TT, bmw 3 series are obserd, it must be compared to the Mustang of the late camaros of the world.
Unfortunately this car is going to outsell the RX-8 by leaps and bounds. Its sad fact is that most people swear that they know everything there is to know about cars, there are few true enthusiasts around. The guy that swears he knows everything will probably buy the 350Z, it fits that huge demographic perfectly. On the other hand the RX-8 might seem like the bastard son of the RX-7 and a saturn, but its and enthusiasts car, and the true car lover will probably seek out the RX-8. The market however is probably alot smaller than what everyone on this forum would like to believe.
Ok, heres my conclusion. The RX-8 is a cool idea, I love rotaries and the third gen rx7 is still my dream car, but i dont know how well the RX-8 will sell, even if i had the means, i dont think i would buy the car. Call me a pesimist, but i think the RX-8 is doomed for failure, and we'll probably never see a rotary car following the RX-8. I dont think the world is ready for the RX-8, i wish they would just make another RX-7 that would do what the 3rd gen did, give you true supercar performance at reasonable cost.
Tell me what you think"
First of all, he needs an education. "Obserd" being the clear identifier. lol
He even contradicts himself most obviously. He says that the "true car lover will probably seek out the RX-8" but then he later says he probably won't buy the car. I guess he's not a "true car lover". lol Am I wrong in understanding that he won't buy the RX-8 because it won't sell well? That seem to be his reasoning, but he blasts the 350Z as a car that will "outsell the RX-8 by leaps and bounds". I see some inconsistency there, but I might be mistaken.
My assessment? DUMBASS...
Oh, and what's with those other posts? The 350Z weighs 3400 lbs???? Since when? We run 16 sec. 1/4s? Since when???
Then there's the guy quoting SCC and not understanding that the quote he chose was a GOOD thing.
These guys are magazine racers who probably have never driven any of the cars they talk about, especially a Z. We all know the dealers aren't allowing test drives.
These guys are just envious...-Jon
Last edited by WashUJon; 02-03-2003 at 07:37 AM.
02-03-2003, 07:34 AM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 4,084
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by droidekaus
"Hercules" is a clown. Definitely the type who drinks too much a manufacturer's Kool-Aid and becomes completely myopic. I like the RX-8, a lot, and would consider one for a second car. That being said, I will enjoy hunting these little ****** down and kicking the **** out of them.
"Hercules" is a clown. Definitely the type who drinks too much a manufacturer's Kool-Aid and becomes completely myopic. I like the RX-8, a lot, and would consider one for a second car. That being said, I will enjoy hunting these little ****** down and kicking the **** out of them.
02-03-2003, 08:44 AM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, the typical bickering among insecure auto owners. The people who post crap like this are usually the ones who are insecure with what they've purchased. And instead of just being happy with what they have they try to tear down everything that's in market competition with it. Childish. Same thing goes on in all the bike forums.
I bet the 8 is a fantastic car, I just don't like the way it looks. I also think the 350 is a better street car...more grunt, less need to wind the **** out of it to get it going. Different strokes for different folks. But you'll never catch me coming on here and posting how such and such car sucks. That's petty.
I bet the 8 is a fantastic car, I just don't like the way it looks. I also think the 350 is a better street car...more grunt, less need to wind the **** out of it to get it going. Different strokes for different folks. But you'll never catch me coming on here and posting how such and such car sucks. That's petty.
Last edited by UFO; 02-03-2003 at 08:54 AM.
02-03-2003, 08:48 AM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm still trying to get used to the looks of the RX-8.
The guy compares the the 350Z with a Mustang GT... I'll bet your Mazda RX-8 has plenty of Ford parts in it! Also, I'm still weary of the rotary, with all the stories of people having to rebuild/replace their engine.
The guy compares the the 350Z with a Mustang GT... I'll bet your Mazda RX-8 has plenty of Ford parts in it! Also, I'm still weary of the rotary, with all the stories of people having to rebuild/replace their engine.
02-03-2003, 10:40 AM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's this nonsense about the torque curves? You'd think that's the last thing the RX-8 guys would want to start mentioning is torque.
Isn't the new Renesis putting down like a maximum of 160 ft-lbs
at 7000 rpm? Meahwhile the VQ is putting down 200 ft-lbs at 2000 rpm and only climbs from there.
And exactly how is the Z copying Detroit? Because the engine makes torque down low and doesn't need to rev to 9000 rpm to make decent HP?
Funny how in a recent comparo between the Z, the TT, the Honda S2000 and the Mustang, the "japanese" car was the second slowest around the track and the "Detroit copy car" (aka the Z) was the quickest. I guess having no torque isn't such a great thing.
Isn't the new Renesis putting down like a maximum of 160 ft-lbs
at 7000 rpm? Meahwhile the VQ is putting down 200 ft-lbs at 2000 rpm and only climbs from there.
And exactly how is the Z copying Detroit? Because the engine makes torque down low and doesn't need to rev to 9000 rpm to make decent HP?
Funny how in a recent comparo between the Z, the TT, the Honda S2000 and the Mustang, the "japanese" car was the second slowest around the track and the "Detroit copy car" (aka the Z) was the quickest. I guess having no torque isn't such a great thing.
02-03-2003, 11:05 AM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by eric_c
Funny how in a recent comparo between the Z, the TT, the Honda S2000 and the Mustang, the "japanese" car was the second slowest around the track and the "Detroit copy car" (aka the Z) was the quickest. I guess having no torque isn't such a great thing.
Funny how in a recent comparo between the Z, the TT, the Honda S2000 and the Mustang, the "japanese" car was the second slowest around the track and the "Detroit copy car" (aka the Z) was the quickest. I guess having no torque isn't such a great thing.
That being said the Audi TT got the shortest end of the stick in that comparo, they picked the 180 hp instead of the 225 hp version.
02-03-2003, 11:28 AM
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didn't mention anything about 0-60 times, I was referring to the best lap time as set by each car around the track. I'm not sure how this is magazine racing and not just plain racing. This was 4 drivers at the same track, on the same day, at the same time, racing the 4 cars. The Z set the fastest lap, followed by the Stang, the S2000 and the TT.
I was using this as an example because the RX-8's engine appears, at least to me, to be similar to the S2000's in terms of power delivery and torque - HP and torque show up at high RPM, and maximum torque is low.
I agree that comparing 0-60 times is relatively pointless given that this will vary greatly on the driver and the ambient conditions at the time.
For example, everyone knows that getting 0-60 times of 5.2 seconds (or 6.3 for that fact) in an S2000 is accomplished by dumping the clutch near redline. I don't know of too many people who would do an 8000 rpm clutch dump on a $30 000 car. Hence, this time is somewhat difficult for the average driver to duplicate on a consistent basis and perhaps not a good measure of the cars performance.
I was using this as an example because the RX-8's engine appears, at least to me, to be similar to the S2000's in terms of power delivery and torque - HP and torque show up at high RPM, and maximum torque is low.
I agree that comparing 0-60 times is relatively pointless given that this will vary greatly on the driver and the ambient conditions at the time.
For example, everyone knows that getting 0-60 times of 5.2 seconds (or 6.3 for that fact) in an S2000 is accomplished by dumping the clutch near redline. I don't know of too many people who would do an 8000 rpm clutch dump on a $30 000 car. Hence, this time is somewhat difficult for the average driver to duplicate on a consistent basis and perhaps not a good measure of the cars performance.
Originally posted by 02SilverS2000
Ahh Yes!!! Magazine racing, trust me on this you'll love to quote the magazine's until the Z's newness wears off and they start to turn on you. It will happen, always does. Not long ago the S2k's were running as low as 5.2s 0-60's, and know in the article you're talking about they stated 6.3s 0-60.
That being said the Audi TT got the shortest end of the stick in that comparo, they picked the 180 hp instead of the 225 hp version.
Ahh Yes!!! Magazine racing, trust me on this you'll love to quote the magazine's until the Z's newness wears off and they start to turn on you. It will happen, always does. Not long ago the S2k's were running as low as 5.2s 0-60's, and know in the article you're talking about they stated 6.3s 0-60.
That being said the Audi TT got the shortest end of the stick in that comparo, they picked the 180 hp instead of the 225 hp version.
02-03-2003, 12:00 PM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by eric_c
I didn't mention anything about 0-60 times, I was referring to the best lap time as set by each car around the track. I'm not sure how this is magazine racing and not just plain racing. This was 4 drivers at the same track, on the same day, at the same time, racing the 4 cars. The Z set the fastest lap, followed by the Stang, the S2000 and the TT.
I didn't mention anything about 0-60 times, I was referring to the best lap time as set by each car around the track. I'm not sure how this is magazine racing and not just plain racing. This was 4 drivers at the same track, on the same day, at the same time, racing the 4 cars. The Z set the fastest lap, followed by the Stang, the S2000 and the TT.
"Despite all this, the S2000 was 0.7 mph slower over its fastest lap than the porkier 350Z and only 0.5 mph faster than the clomping Mustang Mach 1. "
Originally posted by eric_c
For example, everyone knows that getting 0-60 times of 5.2 seconds (or 6.3 for that fact) in an S2000 is accomplished by dumping the clutch near redline. I don't know of too many people who would do an 8000 rpm clutch dump on a $30 000 car. Hence, this time is somewhat difficult for the average driver to duplicate on a consistent basis and perhaps not a good measure of the cars performance.
For example, everyone knows that getting 0-60 times of 5.2 seconds (or 6.3 for that fact) in an S2000 is accomplished by dumping the clutch near redline. I don't know of too many people who would do an 8000 rpm clutch dump on a $30 000 car. Hence, this time is somewhat difficult for the average driver to duplicate on a consistent basis and perhaps not a good measure of the cars performance.
Please, don't misunderstand my post. I have been researching the Z as a possible purchase. I am not here to defend the S2k or become a hated troll, I just had to clear up any confusion. I think both are great cars, not sure about how important a drop top is to me. I can't wait for the 350Z convertible, that is after the dealers get over the $5k markup.
02-03-2003, 12:04 PM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My mistake. I thought the Stang came in second but now that I read the quote I recall it was the S2000. My bad...
[QUOTE]Originally posted by 02SilverS2000
[B]Sorry I was confused, you read the article wrong. The S2000 came in 2nd on the track behind the 350Z but AHEAD of the Mach 1. Quote from the article:
"Despite all this, the S2000 was 0.7 mph slower over its fastest lap than the porkier 350Z and only 0.5 mph faster than the clomping Mustang Mach 1. "
[QUOTE]Originally posted by 02SilverS2000
[B]Sorry I was confused, you read the article wrong. The S2000 came in 2nd on the track behind the 350Z but AHEAD of the Mach 1. Quote from the article:
"Despite all this, the S2000 was 0.7 mph slower over its fastest lap than the porkier 350Z and only 0.5 mph faster than the clomping Mustang Mach 1. "
02-03-2003, 12:17 PM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No problem Eric. As you can imagine my pride is still a little sore after coming in third behind the Mustang. Just talking about it months later still stings.. 
Damn that article....
Damn that article....
02-03-2003, 12:21 PM
#18
Registered User
I have to throw my hat in with eric_c... I've seen a LOT of S2000s on the street since they were introduced... never have I seen one dump the clutch at 8000rpm, 6500rpm, or really anything remotely north of 4000. Without that type of launch where is the quick 0-60?
I, on the other hand, have done numerous 3000rpm launches in my 350Z and will continue to so... and I bet I get 0-60 in 6 seconds or less almost every time I do this.
Also, I have seen several posts in other forums bashing the Zs uneven weight distribution (I don't know the exact number, but isn't it like 53% front/47% rear?). I don't see how anyone has a leg to stand on in this argument. Weight distribution matters if you are fixated on a particular driving style, but a 53/47 car can handle as good or better than a 50/50 car driven by the same driver. It's more a matter of learning your car's capabilities than anything else. Now if you were talking 60/40, that's a bit different. I've always heard a little bit nose heavy was better for performance driving... any hard core AutoX-ers out there care to give your opinions on this?
As for the RX-8... I expect it will be a decent car, maybe even quick (not as quick as the Z of course!), but it is still, to me, a very ugly design...
I, on the other hand, have done numerous 3000rpm launches in my 350Z and will continue to so... and I bet I get 0-60 in 6 seconds or less almost every time I do this.
Also, I have seen several posts in other forums bashing the Zs uneven weight distribution (I don't know the exact number, but isn't it like 53% front/47% rear?). I don't see how anyone has a leg to stand on in this argument. Weight distribution matters if you are fixated on a particular driving style, but a 53/47 car can handle as good or better than a 50/50 car driven by the same driver. It's more a matter of learning your car's capabilities than anything else. Now if you were talking 60/40, that's a bit different. I've always heard a little bit nose heavy was better for performance driving... any hard core AutoX-ers out there care to give your opinions on this?
As for the RX-8... I expect it will be a decent car, maybe even quick (not as quick as the Z of course!
), but it is still, to me, a very ugly design...
02-03-2003, 12:24 PM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, if its any consolation I'd pick the S2000 over the Stang. 
I'm hoping to hear within the next hour whether my Pirelli Snowsports 240's came in so I can go pick up my CS 350Z from the dealer. The waiting is killing me.
I'm hoping to hear within the next hour whether my Pirelli Snowsports 240's came in so I can go pick up my CS 350Z from the dealer. The waiting is killing me.
Originally posted by 02SilverS2000
No problem Eric. As you can imagine my pride is still a little sore after coming in third behind the Mustang. Just talking about it months later still stings..
Damn that article....
No problem Eric. As you can imagine my pride is still a little sore after coming in third behind the Mustang. Just talking about it months later still stings..
Damn that article....
02-03-2003, 12:41 PM
#20
Wow, did we talk this much trash before our car come out? If we did I would like to apologize. After reading that trash over there I was like WTF. By the way put our car on scales and you will be surprised. They are much lighter in person (remember the camera adds about 100 lbs). On corner scales we were getting 50/50 and 51/49 distributions with drivers!
16 seconds in the 1/4. Yeah I see that . . . if you have traction control on talking on a cell phone while drinking a big gulp, finding a radio station, lowering the windows to holla at your boys, and signing autographs halfway through because we drive a hot car!
Give me a break. They are just upset Mazda does not have the ***** to release a new RX-7. I would at least respect their claims alot more if we would have a better challenger than the RX-8.
16 seconds in the 1/4. Yeah I see that . . . if you have traction control on talking on a cell phone while drinking a big gulp, finding a radio station, lowering the windows to holla at your boys, and signing autographs halfway through because we drive a hot car!
Give me a break. They are just upset Mazda does not have the ***** to release a new RX-7. I would at least respect their claims alot more if we would have a better challenger than the RX-8.