Notices
2003-2009 Nissan 350Z

07 350Z vs 07 S2K vs 06 GTO. Opinions.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-29-2007, 08:18 PM
  #281  
Zmazing03
Registered User
iTrader: (9)
 
Zmazing03's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Waterbury, CT
Posts: 12,899
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

To clarify:

The 178-179 MPH claim was the following setup:

Speed limiter removed
CAI
7100 RPM redline

At the top of 5th gear, it was doing 178.

You seem to think 180 mph isn't possible. Well it is, I just never claimed you can do it stock.

That is all.
Old 05-29-2007, 09:58 PM
  #282  
Karma_Hunden
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Karma_Hunden's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ft. Lauderdale
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by SOLO-350Z
Funny thing is you aren't liked on this forum already. I see another post that people are already *****ing about you even mods.
LOL yes...I guess Im gonna have to pay them so they can like me...right SOLO? That way I can become a well-"liked" member and talk all the crap possible about things I dont know and cars I dont own, regarding my awesome username...I will continue to state my incorrect stubborn opinion and annoy everyone with youtube videos and smartass remarks. I will ask for them to give me a reason to dispprove my comments even though it is clearly arbitrarily claimed by most of the members in my350z.com that my point is incorrect. I will also ignore their biased opinions, even though they own the car and I dont. I will proceed to call names at people who I think are wrong or contradict me, and if they defend themselves by replying, I will engage them in an internet war with my e-thuggatry, since Im 99.99% sure, I wont see them in person. Praise the internet!

Last edited by Karma_Hunden; 05-29-2007 at 10:02 PM.
Old 05-30-2007, 05:23 AM
  #283  
S8ER95Z
New Member
 
S8ER95Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Quad Cities
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by SOLO-350Z
Dunno about better aeros than a fbody. But I believe what the GTO owners say, 165~ is the max the car can get stock without any upgrades. They even said it on the forums.
I do.. .while you have been emerged in 350Z and G35 ownership I have been living eyes wide open with LS1, LS2, LS6 powered cars... I even keep up on mustangs and read through the BS on this site trying to keep fact from fiction.

Things to keep in mind.

A C6 corvette has a Cd of .28
A C5 corvette has a Cd of .29
A GTO stock has a Cd of .31
A C5 Z06 has a Cd of .31
A C6 Z06 has a Cd of .34
An LT1 style F-Body has a Cd of .34 (Don't know LS1 Cd because it was due to be cancelled and GM never did any wind tunnel test on the new design)

With ~350rwhp a C6 can achieve 186mph
With ~300rwhp a C5 can achieve 175mph
With ~350rwhp a GTO can only reach 165mph according to you
With ~360rwhp a C5 Z06 can only reach 171mph (Gearing Limited)
With ~300rwhp an Fbody can reach low 170s (171 is about the best according to the guy I spoke to who races salt flats)
With ~440rwhp the C6 Z06 is obviously high 190s.
Old 05-30-2007, 06:43 AM
  #284  
HDPDZO6
Registered User
 
HDPDZO6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 5,998
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by S8ER95Z
I do.. .while you have been emerged in 350Z and G35 ownership I have been living eyes wide open with LS1, LS2, LS6 powered cars... I even keep up on mustangs and read through the BS on this site trying to keep fact from fiction.

Things to keep in mind.

A C6 corvette has a Cd of .28
A C5 corvette has a Cd of .29
A GTO stock has a Cd of .31
A C5 Z06 has a Cd of .31
A C6 Z06 has a Cd of .34
An LT1 style F-Body has a Cd of .34 (Don't know LS1 Cd because it was due to be cancelled and GM never did any wind tunnel test on the new design)

With ~350rwhp a C6 can achieve 186mph
With ~300rwhp a C5 can achieve 175mph
With ~350rwhp a GTO can only reach 165mph according to you
With ~360rwhp a C5 Z06 can only reach 171mph (Gearing Limited)
With ~300rwhp an Fbody can reach low 170s (171 is about the best according to the guy I spoke to who races salt flats)
With ~440rwhp the C6 Z06 is obviously high 190s.


The C5Z has a CD of .29 & the C6Z has a CD of .28
Old 05-30-2007, 07:13 AM
  #285  
SOLO-350Z
'12 TL SH-AWD
iTrader: (26)
 
SOLO-350Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Alamo
Posts: 6,348
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

The GTO weighs a ton more than the Vettes. That is why they can't hit that top speed. It takes a lot more power to get that high of speed with the weight it has and aerodynamics.

G35 has .26 CD.

Like I said, have the real GTO owners tell us they can actually do that stock with proof.

Originally Posted by S8ER95Z
I do.. .while you have been emerged in 350Z and G35 ownership I have been living eyes wide open with LS1, LS2, LS6 powered cars... I even keep up on mustangs and read through the BS on this site trying to keep fact from fiction.

Things to keep in mind.

A C6 corvette has a Cd of .28
A C5 corvette has a Cd of .29
A GTO stock has a Cd of .31
A C5 Z06 has a Cd of .31
A C6 Z06 has a Cd of .34
An LT1 style F-Body has a Cd of .34 (Don't know LS1 Cd because it was due to be cancelled and GM never did any wind tunnel test on the new design)

With ~350rwhp a C6 can achieve 186mph
With ~300rwhp a C5 can achieve 175mph
With ~350rwhp a GTO can only reach 165mph according to you
With ~360rwhp a C5 Z06 can only reach 171mph (Gearing Limited)
With ~300rwhp an Fbody can reach low 170s (171 is about the best according to the guy I spoke to who races salt flats)
With ~440rwhp the C6 Z06 is obviously high 190s.

Last edited by SOLO-350Z; 05-30-2007 at 07:27 AM.
Old 05-30-2007, 09:33 AM
  #286  
S8ER95Z
New Member
 
S8ER95Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Quad Cities
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

If you think that weight is what would keep the GTO from topping out better than an LS1 Fbody you are not even worth talking to.

As for the Cd of the Z06 cars...please look it up.. you are wrong. They are not the same as the normal C5 and C6 models.

I do however have the C5 Z06 at .31 according to here,
http://www.corvetteactioncenter.com/...6/2001z06.html

and the C6 Z06 at .34 according to these sources...
http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews.../features.html
http://www.autoworld.com/apps/news/F...ry.asp?id=5834

Last edited by S8ER95Z; 05-30-2007 at 09:40 AM.
Old 05-30-2007, 09:40 AM
  #287  
SOLO-350Z
'12 TL SH-AWD
iTrader: (26)
 
SOLO-350Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Alamo
Posts: 6,348
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by S8ER95Z
If you think that weight is keeping the GTO from topping out better than an LS1 Fbody you are not even worth talking to.

As for the Cd of the Z06 cars...please look it up.. you are wrong. They are not the same as the normal C5 and C6 models.
Well the Fbody weighted near the same as the GTO. They couldn't do much above 165 either.

Now on the CD with the other guy and you. How can the ZO6 not Z ZERO 6 get worse CD over the same lower model? Please explain that one. Because I find that hard to believe when I don't see much different at all on the body.
Old 05-30-2007, 10:12 AM
  #288  
S8ER95Z
New Member
 
S8ER95Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Quad Cities
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Air inducts for the brakes and lower chin spoiler just to name obvious things.

Not my information that I am posting... information is coming from GM camp.
http://media.gm.com/us/chevrolet/en/...e/07index.html
it says right on GMs page... "The Z06’s Cd is.34."

Since the C5 Z06 is archived I have to go with data from other magazine reviews (who get there information from the manufacturer.)

Also..not to hurt your box or anything but it is in fact...Z-ZERO-6. (ever heard of RPOs?)
When spoken people say Z-Oh-6... in europe I belive they say Zed-zero-six and in america we are retarded and transpose zero and oh as if they are one and the same.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show...post1552109104

Do some research before attacking me... you just embarass yourself.

As for the 3 hundred lb difference between the GTO and F-Body making a difference in top speed... hmm.. I hope you realize that the F-Body was speed limited to ''162mph'' (its actually a scaler value and not set to a value so it maybe slightly more/slightly less on each car) it's not a true drag limit...in fact when you hit the limiter it jerks the car because it is still acelerating and is no where near finished. We are discussing the ability of the car with this removed... That being said the GTO obvious has better aeros than the Fbody and its sibling (the Monaro) has been noted at 185+mph (even tested on Top Gear by Jeremy Clarkson).. I will end this knowing what I know and you can continue to fight the good fight... doesn't matter to me.

Last edited by S8ER95Z; 05-30-2007 at 10:32 AM.
Old 05-30-2007, 10:44 AM
  #289  
SOLO-350Z
'12 TL SH-AWD
iTrader: (26)
 
SOLO-350Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Alamo
Posts: 6,348
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Robert, if you know anything about Fbodys, you would know certain models did not have speed limiters stock. Mine was one of them. It had the correct tire package and gearing which it did not have a speed limiter. I never took it that fast, but the dyno showed it going way way up 180+.

It's been so long that I do not recall what the exact options were to get the no speed limiter, but I had to search hard to get mine. I owned a 99 TransAm MT6.

Also depending on the model Fbody, you can get a base Z28 that weighs in at 3400 lb and would haul butt. My friend got one and that car screamed. He still has it, and its been stroked by MTI for a few years now putting down around 420 to the wheels with NOS its about 550.

Originally Posted by S8ER95Z
Air inducts for the brakes and lower chin spoiler just to name obvious things.

Not my information that I am posting... information is coming from GM camp.
http://media.gm.com/us/chevrolet/en/...e/07index.html
it says right on GMs page... "The Z06’s Cd is.34."

Since the C5 Z06 is archived I have to go with data from other magazine reviews (who get there information from the manufacturer.)

Also..not to hurt your box or anything but it is in fact...Z-ZERO-6. (ever heard of RPOs?)
When spoken people say Z-Oh-6... in europe I belive they say Zed-zero-six and in america we are retarded and transpose zero and oh as if they are one and the same.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show...post1552109104

Do some research before attacking me... you just embarass yourself.

As for the 3 hundred lb difference between the GTO and F-Body making a difference in top speed... hmm.. I hope you realize that the F-Body was speed limited to ''162mph'' (its actually a scaler value and not set to a value so it maybe slightly more/slightly less on each car) it's not a true drag limit...in fact when you hit the limiter it jerks the car because it is still acelerating and is no where near finished. We are discussing the ability of the car with this removed... That being said the GTO obvious has better aeros than the Fbody and its sibling (the Monaro) has been noted at 185+mph (even tested on Top Gear by Jeremy Clarkson).. I will end this knowing what I know and you can continue to fight the good fight... doesn't matter to me.

Last edited by SOLO-350Z; 05-30-2007 at 10:48 AM.
Old 05-30-2007, 11:22 AM
  #290  
S8ER95Z
New Member
 
S8ER95Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Quad Cities
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

The 'no limiter' only existed on LT1 models... all LS1 model cars had a factory limiter based on tire options...my 1995 LT1 Auto had the 'limiter' value set to 255mph from the factory.. but as far as I am aware (and I have spoken with many tuners) all LS1 cars (98+) are limited either at the '123mph' mark or '162mph' mark based on tire options. If you could find prove otherwise I would be glad to know.

It sounds like you tapped the limiter and didn't realize it.
Old 05-30-2007, 11:27 AM
  #291  
SOLO-350Z
'12 TL SH-AWD
iTrader: (26)
 
SOLO-350Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Alamo
Posts: 6,348
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by S8ER95Z
The 'no limiter' only existed on LT1 models... all LS1 model cars had a factory limiter based on tire options...my 1995 LT1 Auto had the 'limiter' value set to 255mph from the factory.. but as far as I am aware (and I have spoken with many tuners) all LS1 cars (98+) are limited either at the '123mph' mark or '162mph' mark based on tire options. If you could find prove otherwise I would be glad to know.

It sounds like you tapped the limiter and didn't realize it.
Yep your right. Mine had the optional Z rated tires.

My LS1 did reach 150mph bone stock and that was driving it. It saw 180+ on the dyno. Nothing done to it except Whisper lid, whisper maf, and the shift-skip resistor.

Last edited by SOLO-350Z; 05-30-2007 at 11:41 AM.
Old 05-30-2007, 07:07 PM
  #292  
D_K
Registered User
 
D_K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UNKNOWN
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

My experience with both of my Z's has been great. Killer power in my previous 03 auto , Even more killer power in my 07 6speed and stock s2k's run from it . The s2k's have little initial and mid torque so I hope you'll enjoy giving your opponents head starts .

In the looks department , the car (Z) gets complements everywhere I go , the chicks give the "I wanna F*$k you so bad right f@#ing now " look when they look at it and then see a 24yr old in it haha. The car looks muscular and huge (maybe thats why the chicks give that look? hahaha) Best of all , no need to upgrade its looks for a good long while with either the inside or outside.

you will have better gas mileage on the s2k . S2k however isn't really a performance car in my opinion , it just looks like one .

as for the GTO , well it does have more power than the Z however its the ugliest of the 3 in my opinion. The thing looks like a cheap pos . I mean , do you honestly get the WOW feeling just looking at it ? Again only nice fact about it is that it does have more power than the Z so I'll give it that but no way in hell would I EVER buy it over an S2K even less over my beloved Z .
Old 05-30-2007, 07:33 PM
  #293  
Karma_Hunden
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Karma_Hunden's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ft. Lauderdale
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I actually read today, that the millage on the S2K sucks...somewhere around 260miles the tank, while as the new 07 Z gets a whoopin 380.
Old 05-30-2007, 07:52 PM
  #294  
carlos067
New Member
iTrader: (1)
 
carlos067's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: all over fla
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

This thread is SOO awesome!! my support 150% LOL
Old 05-30-2007, 08:02 PM
  #295  
turismo
Registered User
iTrader: (33)
 
turismo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: curl lookin boy
Posts: 8,448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Karma_Hunden
I actually read today, that the millage on the S2K sucks...somewhere around 260miles the tank, while as the new 07 Z gets a whoopin 380.

Thats kind of misleading, since the Z, has a much larger fuel tank. It is true, for some odd reason, that the S2k has **** poor mpg.
Old 05-30-2007, 08:33 PM
  #296  
Peak350
Registered User
iTrader: (6)
 
Peak350's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: DeLand, Florida
Posts: 1,844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Karma_Hunden
I actually read today, that the millage on the S2K sucks...somewhere around 260miles the tank, while as the new 07 Z gets a whoopin 380.
I'm getting about 17 MPG FWIW ... lead foot and traffic both kill it beyond what highway can save it.

And guys.... you do know that the equation for a drag force is:

Fd = Cd * A * v^2

"A" being the frontal surface area of the car. Its meaningless to have a dumb low Cd if you have a huge surface area, and why .3 seems to be the hangup point.

Just thought I'd clear up the meaningless comparisons, a Cd is meaningless without frontal area.
Old 05-30-2007, 08:54 PM
  #297  
Karma_Hunden
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Karma_Hunden's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ft. Lauderdale
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

i read it at the motortrend 2007 car comparison magazine for all of you wondering. saw it at walgreens.
Old 05-31-2007, 04:24 AM
  #298  
SOLO-350Z
'12 TL SH-AWD
iTrader: (26)
 
SOLO-350Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Alamo
Posts: 6,348
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Karma_Hunden
I actually read today, that the millage on the S2K sucks...somewhere around 260miles the tank, while as the new 07 Z gets a whoopin 380.
You can't go by what it gets per tank. Honda is known for putting much smaller gas tanks in their cars. That is why it gets much less but I can promise you it gets much better gas mileage.

My G35 had a 20 gallon tank. My TL has a 17~. It only gets on average 280 miles per tank, my G35 did 320. TL gets a little better mileage.
Old 05-31-2007, 05:36 AM
  #299  
S8ER95Z
New Member
 
S8ER95Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Quad Cities
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Peak350
I'm getting about 17 MPG FWIW ... lead foot and traffic both kill it beyond what highway can save it.

And guys.... you do know that the equation for a drag force is:

Fd = Cd * A * v^2

"A" being the frontal surface area of the car. Its meaningless to have a dumb low Cd if you have a huge surface area, and why .3 seems to be the hangup point.

Just thought I'd clear up the meaningless comparisons, a Cd is meaningless without frontal area.
Feel free to correct these as needed..it was a PITA to find numbers....

C5: Drag area, Cd (.29) x frontal area (21.3 sq ft): 6.177
C5 Z06: Drag area Cd (.31) x frontal area (21.3 sq ft): 6.603
LT1 Z28: Drag area Cd (.34) x frontal area (22.0 sq ft): 7.48
LS1 Z28: Drag area Cd (.34) x frontal area (21.6 sq ft): 7.344
GTO: Drag area, Cd (.31) x frontal area (23.3 sq ft): 7.22
C6: Drag area, Cd (0.28) x frontal area (21.6 sq ft): 6.048
C6 Z06: Drag area, Cd (0.34) x frontal area (22.3 sq ft): 7.582

FWIW.
350Z track/gt: Drag area, Cd (0.29) x frontal area (23.7 sq ft): 6.873
350Z base/t/e: Drag area, Cd (0.30) x frontal area (23.7 sq ft): 7.11
350Z roadster: Drag area, Cd (0.34) x frontal area (23.7 sq ft): 8.058

Last edited by S8ER95Z; 05-31-2007 at 06:25 AM.
Old 05-31-2007, 05:49 AM
  #300  
SOLO-350Z
'12 TL SH-AWD
iTrader: (26)
 
SOLO-350Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Alamo
Posts: 6,348
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

The G35 Sedan has an exceptional coefficient of drag measurement of just 0.27 (0.26 with optional rear spoiler) for reduced wind noise and increased fuel economy.

Nissan 350z

The coefficient of drag is 0.30 for the base, Enthusiast and Touring models and 0.29 for the Track and Grand Touring models – which include front and rear spoilers. Roadster coefficient of drag is 0.34.

C6 Z06 has a .31 Drag CD.

http://www.corvettekillstories.com/f...showtopic=3631


Quick Reply: 07 350Z vs 07 S2K vs 06 GTO. Opinions.



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:15 PM.