rai

Ok before you think I've gone off the deep end, I am talking about the porsche 930 (1976 911 turbo) first US version. This car cost about $28K, had 260 HP and had recorded times, of 0-62 in 5.2 sec and claimed top speed of 156-160 mph. The 1/4 mile was 13.5 sec. If you can find one it may cost the same as a new 350Z.

The Z has a lot more amenities and features, will stop and handle better. It's a wonder that the lowly VQ that is much malinged by some is more powerful and much more refined than one of the best and race tested engines of it's time.

As you can tell I'm getting bored and wanted to see if you all can come up with other cars the Z is compairable to. One that comes to mind is the ferrari 328 GTS. Interestingly, you can pick one of these up in the low $30K's also.

z350z

I was thinking about this a while ago -- I remember I knew someone with one of those '76 Porsche Turbos, and everyone was in such awe with its power and performance. Now the new Z is more powerful, and has far more torque. Handles a lot better too, without that nasty wagging tail. It's amazing how far things have come; what was once an exotic supercar is outperformed by a reliable, reasonably priced mass-produced sports car.

It's a great time to be alive (and getting a new Z)!

rai

I have know this guy that has a new 911 tt(2001), he is a little arrogant about how his car is so great. I haven't driven it yet, but I did go for a ride and must say it is quite nice.

But he's like "Too bad the Z is gonna be slower than my tt" OK but my entire car (track version) costs less than just his engine alone. I can take the extra $90K and buy like 2 or 3 nice cars.

fatZo

I am sorry but there really is no comparison. It is absolutely incredible that a car that is more than 25 years old can outperform a 2003 car. Let's not forget that Porsche has some of the best handling a true sports car can provide. Although the Z's performance may be up to par with an older 930, I highly suspect that the Z can provide similar handling.

mdouvris

It only has 260hp. It is ,however, a super cool car. Ferarri is a racing name. That car at least will be easy to find parts for since it was the most produced Ferarri ever. That thing in black is still a head turner. I hate the red one cause everyone still thinks it's a magnum pi car. Having a horse on your car is a good thing! A new Z is the way to go. Less headaches

rai

I don't want to put the 930 down, but there is no way of saying which car is the better handleing car unless you can have them driven back to back by a professional driver on a race track. The 930 has gotten a bad rap for wanting to swing it's tail out if you lift off the gas in a turn, so it seems like you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. A professional driver may not have to worry, but the average joe will have a harder time driving the 930.

But I don't think there is much debate that the Z will have much shorter braking distances. If you can translate this fact onto the track, it may be possible to brake later with the Z. You could probably look it up but I think if the Z is stopping from 70 in 164 feet the 930 was taking over 200 feet. Correect me if I'm wrong.

I'm just trying to say that 1) the 930 was/is a great car, way ahead of its time. 2) it's nice that we can get close to the performance of a car that in its time was a world beater, and that we can get it for a reasonable price. and 3) for the price of a new Z we could get the turbo (although it will require a lot of sacrifice not to mention the maintanence issues)

rai

I've always wanted a ferrari, but even at this price I am worried about it breaking down. It's not that I can't afford a repair, but I think I would be driving it like I was walking on egg shells, I would like to be able to drop the clutch without having the spector of something breaking. Too bad but for a lot of people the ferrari is more of a sunday morning car to tool around in and be seen in, not a car to take to the track for some hot laps.

fatZo

I concur with all points. I myself was torn between getting a late 80's 930 or a late 90's 993 or the Z. I am going to wait and testdrive the Z once it becomes available, then decide what to get.

The Ferrari 328 is also a solid car, and goes for around the same price as the new Z. One thing to consider is that the older 930's and Ferraris may become a money pit, as the costs of maintaining the car are quite high. In contrast, the VQ engine is very robust and requires minimal tlc.

christurismohk

iTrader: (2)

LOL, agree! how about "too bad, even the ferrari 360 modena cant beat my tt" your friend is comparing the Z with the 911 tt..thats a little too far...

#15Blade

Better yet, in a year or so (once they iron the bugs out) you can add a supercharger for about $8k installed and match or probably beat his 911, and still have $80k left over. 'Course to make it really fair, you should pay $10-15k for a twin turbo set up... I mean he has twin turbos, shouldn't you?

rickski

My personal experience with a 944 Turbo was that it handled very well and was quick (only between 4500 and 6500 RPM ). However, I would have to say that in order to keep the "older ones" running properly, they are definately a money pit. Every visit to my mechanic would cost a minimum of $1,000. I was there at least 5 times a year. They are high maintenance and you need to stay on-top-of-it all the time.

I sold it to get the Z. I was able to sell it for a decent amount of money. However, I dropped a ton of money in it.

I was looking for similar performance, which I think I will definately be getting with the Z...and without the problems.

BILL T

When I had my 911 serviced last year I noticed a 930 in the next bay. It had a seized engine and 'asked about the turbo's in general. The mechanic said to absolutely stay away from them unless I had a very fat wallet and didn't mind him having the car more than me. He said the problem is the heat of the air cooled engine and turbo's just make it worse. I believe in '98 Porsche went to water cooling which might make things better but 'don't know.

rai

Did you feel the turbo lag? I mean was it like you want power, step on the gas......wait a second... power?

I think this is one area the 350Z will excell when compaired with the STI and the EVO both are small displacement fours making similar power to the Z.

One of my favorite quotes was about the G35 sedan, R&T said it felt like an american V8 down low. Now the last thing I want is an american V8 (except maybe in a Z06), but I like to have a broad flat torque curve.

the 944 was a 1.9 L? I think. how many HP? I was thinking maybe 225 HP. Should weigh less than 3000 pounds. even still the Z will beat it in power to weight ratio. Do you remember the 944's vitals? what about 0-60? I would guess around 6.5 sec that was considered fast in its time.

fatZo

still, Porsche is a kick-*** car. It's a performer. The styling is great too. From a "looks" vantage point, any garden-variety rice-maker next to a Porsche, even an NSX, can't even compare to the Porsche's original and sexy styling.

Most rice-makers become transparent in the traffic, because the styling sucks. In a few years from now, there'll probably be sooo many Z's out there, every freakin' zit-face high-school kid would be driving his riced up Z while blasting his 1000000 Watts amp. When was the last time you saw a riced-up Ferrari?

One good thing about Porsches and Ferraris is that they are too expensive. Now that's a good thing, because not everyone can afford one.

rai

I have to disagree with you about the NSX. I think in every way it stands up well against the porsches. If it were being sold at the same price as the 911 that is $70K instead of $90K it would be more sucessful, but as for style i'd take the current NSX over the current 911.

Also look at some other porsches besides the 911 like he 944/928/914. They do not look as classic today as when they were new.

fatZo

I don't want to strongly disagree with you, but the NSX styling is a rip-off of Pinanfarina.

As for the 944/928/914, I agree that they don't stand out much, but at least, they are typically not riced-up to the point of looking absolutely ridiculous.

rai

As for the NSX well if you are going for a knock off might as well go for the best. I can't think of a more exciting japanese design. But if you look at the interior say the guages on the NSX i think they are very classic unlike the 911's boxster knock-offs.

I could live with the NSX and think it will still look good in 20 years. Also it does not blend in the crowed.

rickski

Yes there was definately a lag. Mechanic claimed it had about 280 HP (stock it was 217hp). But only between 4500 and 6500 rpm. It was just enough to tease you. Handled like a dream (50:50 distribution) without the tail kicking out like a 911. (Very forgiving.) The engine was a 2.7 liter 4 cylinder. I have no idea what the 0-60 was for my car. But those that had the same setup would do about 5.4 (the same as the new Z). According to the owner's manual it was supposed to achive a top speed of 150mph. However, it was in the shop frequently and I only drove it on weekends.

I tried to attach a pic. Maybe it worked.

I look forward to the same (or better performance) of the Z and being able to drive it every day without worrying what will break next. (And being under warranty )

fatZo

that's one nasty 944 rickski Turbo lag could be quite disturbing when driving in inclement conditions!

Unlike you, I won't be driving my future car (either the Z or 911/930) on a daily basis, so the reliability point is moot in my particular situation. But I have to admit that undoubtedly, the Z will be an extremely reliable car, and I'm basing this on the solid performance of the VQ engine over the last few years. It sure looks like Nissan has used the right ingredients to come up with a well put-together package.