C&D: Z vs TT vs RX8 vs ShelbyGT
04-26-2007, 01:53 PM
#83
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by VeeTec
Bwahahahaha, the gotta have it, and other lame C&D factors, strike again. The slowest car in group wins their hearts, even with a host of complaints.
Hmmmm, is Mazda paying C&D a little too much?
Hmmmm, is Mazda paying C&D a little too much?
04-26-2007, 05:40 PM
#84
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am going out on a limb here, but I was wondering if anyone else here remembers the shootout they did back in 93 or 94 with the 3000GT VR-4, 300ZX TT, M3, and Supra TT? Once again, very similar situation. 3000GT VR-4 got last place (due to weighing as much as a semi-truck), the Nissan got 3rd, Supra got second, and M3 got first. If any of you remember the horsepower specs, correct me if I am wrong...
VR-4 = 320 hp
Supra = 320 hp
300ZX = 320 hp
M3 = 240 hp
And although it was the slowest, and they complained about the cheap interior, it still got first. I think C&D just loves the underdog. Don't get me wrong, M3 is an incredible driving car, and the motor is some of the most usable 240hp I have ever driven, it still is less fun to drive IMHO, that its twin turbo friends.
VR-4 = 320 hp
Supra = 320 hp
300ZX = 320 hp
M3 = 240 hp
And although it was the slowest, and they complained about the cheap interior, it still got first. I think C&D just loves the underdog. Don't get me wrong, M3 is an incredible driving car, and the motor is some of the most usable 240hp I have ever driven, it still is less fun to drive IMHO, that its twin turbo friends.
04-27-2007, 06:46 AM
#85
New Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Quad Cities
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Magazines really pissed off a lot of people with that 'Gotta Have it' or 'coolness' factor crap. Gee lets add up factual information and toss a subjective score in the mix for no really good reason. Makes sense to me.
Hey the corvette smokes the mini cooper by 9 years around the race track and everything else...but the Mini has a gotta have it score of 9000 points and the vette gets 2.... Mini cooper is the winner.
Hey the corvette smokes the mini cooper by 9 years around the race track and everything else...but the Mini has a gotta have it score of 9000 points and the vette gets 2.... Mini cooper is the winner.
04-27-2007, 07:13 AM
#86
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: MA
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Owned by the C&D "gotta have it factor" again! C&D really irritates with their stupid results, this is nothing new from them.
I'd take the Z over any of those cars with the TT being a close second. RX-8 is the biggest joke of a sports car in modern history, I still remember all the hype it was generating before it was released......too bad it's severly underpowered to be Mazda's sports car.
I'd take the Z over any of those cars with the TT being a close second. RX-8 is the biggest joke of a sports car in modern history, I still remember all the hype it was generating before it was released......too bad it's severly underpowered to be Mazda's sports car.
04-27-2007, 09:54 AM
#88
Funny how inconsistent these magazines are... Back in January C&D posted a comparo test for the 2007 Z and got these numbers:
0-to-60-mph time: 5.6 sec
Quarter-mile time: 14.2 sec @ 99 mph
http://www.caranddriver.com/features...ssan-350z.html
Now all of a sudden they got the 1/4 down by half a second????
0-to-60-mph time: 5.6 sec
Quarter-mile time: 14.2 sec @ 99 mph
http://www.caranddriver.com/features...ssan-350z.html
Now all of a sudden they got the 1/4 down by half a second????
04-27-2007, 10:56 AM
#89
Originally Posted by quidproquo
Funny how inconsistent these magazines are... Back in January C&D posted a comparo test for the 2007 Z and got these numbers:
0-to-60-mph time: 5.6 sec
Quarter-mile time: 14.2 sec @ 99 mph
http://www.caranddriver.com/features...ssan-350z.html
Now all of a sudden they got the 1/4 down by half a second????
0-to-60-mph time: 5.6 sec
Quarter-mile time: 14.2 sec @ 99 mph
http://www.caranddriver.com/features...ssan-350z.html
Now all of a sudden they got the 1/4 down by half a second????
04-27-2007, 07:52 PM
#93
New Member
Originally Posted by Zakira
If the RX-8 is so "gotta have it," then why don't they sell better?
What gets me is when one car beats out another car by 1 or 2 points on their ranking system, but the "gotta have it factor" gives the winner a 5 point advantage. It's like "WTF? So YOU 'gotta have it'...but I don't really care for this car."
04-27-2007, 09:59 PM
#94
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: amsterdam ny
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by abushong504
Yeah you were right. The test was with the regular Shelby GT with the 330 lbs tq and 303 hp. How many mustangs do they make? I see so many different kinds of GT's around town. It is crazy. There is a really nice GT 500, white with blue stripes around here though, and it looks quite amazing.
I agree with you 3000ways. I don't understand how the rx8 was the most fun to drive when they also say is 100 hp short of a sports car or whatever. You would think that contradicts itself. I also didn't like how they were saying that the interior of the Z was so bad. In the test, didn't they use the bare base model Z?. If all the other cars were purchased for around 35k, why not spend the money to get a GT model Z with some nice interior and amenities. The seats in the Z weren't even leather! But, that's just my opinion, I guess I'm a little biased
. But, I definitely don't think the rx8 should have won by that margain, no way.
I agree with you 3000ways. I don't understand how the rx8 was the most fun to drive when they also say is 100 hp short of a sports car or whatever. You would think that contradicts itself. I also didn't like how they were saying that the interior of the Z was so bad. In the test, didn't they use the bare base model Z?. If all the other cars were purchased for around 35k, why not spend the money to get a GT model Z with some nice interior and amenities. The seats in the Z weren't even leather! But, that's just my opinion, I guess I'm a little biased
. But, I definitely don't think the rx8 should have won by that margain, no way.and also the z has the highest top speed(156 MPH) governed
i think the 07 z stock could hit a 165-170 top speed
04-28-2007, 07:33 AM
#96
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by VeeTec
C&D editors are a bunch of sponsor butt kissing, well, you know.
They had to make some BS factor adjustments, so the slowest car could win.
I've driven a few RX8's. They handle well, but I lost the fun to drive factor when I put my foot down, compared to a Z..
They had to make some BS factor adjustments, so the slowest car could win.
I've driven a few RX8's. They handle well, but I lost the fun to drive factor when I put my foot down, compared to a Z..
04-28-2007, 07:40 AM
#97
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Irving, Tx
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just got the mag in the mail yesterday and laughed when I saw the results. A few things that I think should be pointd out for those that didn't get to read it all.
1) The GT Shelby as they describe is a regular Mustang GT that is taken to the Shelby shop and adds a new rear bumper and three non-functional scoops that they say "look JC Whitney cheap". The interior gets a few look pretty pieces and the engine gets an exhaust and intake. Pretty much it is a $10,000 upgrade that they say isn't really anything better over the stock GT.
2) The RX8 wins the performance category when it gets spanked in every test? WTF!
3) I hate the engine db rating they give. They are talking about sports cars. Have you ever seen then complain about the Ferrari engine noise? They praise the loud car!
4) Why are they talking about rear seat space and storage in a sports car? I think the RX8 would take the Ferrari if they did the same challenge if they threw in the engine noise and rear seat space.
5) They say that the RX8 is very underpowered and needs 100hp more to get close to competing.
I think they got the numbers for the cars mixed up and the RX8 accidently won.
1) The GT Shelby as they describe is a regular Mustang GT that is taken to the Shelby shop and adds a new rear bumper and three non-functional scoops that they say "look JC Whitney cheap". The interior gets a few look pretty pieces and the engine gets an exhaust and intake. Pretty much it is a $10,000 upgrade that they say isn't really anything better over the stock GT.
2) The RX8 wins the performance category when it gets spanked in every test? WTF!
3) I hate the engine db rating they give. They are talking about sports cars. Have you ever seen then complain about the Ferrari engine noise? They praise the loud car!
4) Why are they talking about rear seat space and storage in a sports car? I think the RX8 would take the Ferrari if they did the same challenge if they threw in the engine noise and rear seat space.
5) They say that the RX8 is very underpowered and needs 100hp more to get close to competing.
I think they got the numbers for the cars mixed up and the RX8 accidently won.
04-28-2007, 10:38 AM
#98
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Cali
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has anyone had a problem with there head rest bars poking you in the back when you rest your head on it? are they just that FAT cuzz Ive never felt a damn thing in my back when I put my head back.
04-28-2007, 10:42 AM
#99
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Krux
Has anyone had a problem with there head rest bars poking you in the back when you rest your head on it? are they just that FAT cuzz Ive never felt a damn thing in my back when I put my head back.
04-28-2007, 10:49 AM
#100
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Cali
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mansmind
you can feel it yes, and no I'm not fat. You don't feel it unless you you put pressure back against the headrest. Fact is that that's the design.. that's why it's called "active head restraints"
is this on all the seats or just the cloth ones?
maybe I got a good set of seats in my touring I don't know. But I do know ive never felt anything poking my back while driving.