car and driver suck
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Edmonds, WA
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://my350z.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Folks, C&D, SCC and the rest of the US Car Mags are advertisement media-owned ******. I gave up on them a few years back after seeing the "Turbinator" type ads getting shilled in the back advertisers section.
This thread was from last week and was surprised that very few US-based members read or posted replies to it:
https://my350z.com/forum/2003-2009-nissan-350z/274614-2007-350z-review.html
This thread was from last week and was surprised that very few US-based members read or posted replies to it:
https://my350z.com/forum/2003-2009-nissan-350z/274614-2007-350z-review.html
Last edited by EdH350Z; 06-03-2007 at 08:34 AM.
#22
![Default](https://my350z.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by TEF
C&D's decision to pick the RX-8 as the best sports car in a comparison of four (Mustang, Z, Audi TT and RX-8) seemed rather strange. In fact, I started out be reading the writers' impressions of each car. For the Mazda, it was remarked that the RX-8 could not hold a constant high speed (it had to be downshifted at times) and needed 100 hp more. Also, they believed the car to be useless on the track, but they liked the back seat. The Mustang seemed to ride too harshly and the interior of the Z was cheap despite its great track performance. It would seem that C&D mistakenly judged this group of sports cars with standards that one might use when picking the ideal economy sedan. By their reasoning, the Honda Civic coupe would have won this comparison had it been the fifth "sports" car entered. While I am not saying the Z is superior, I do question the logic used by C&D in this instance when selecting the best sports coupe.
i see new Zs hitting the road everyday whereas RX8s sightings are extremely rare these days.
#24
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: .
Posts: 2,071
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://my350z.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by BojanC350z
350z > All others
I do think the Z deserved first place, but it didnt get it. Oh well. It's not the end of the world
![Roll Eyes (Sarcastic)](https://my350z.com/forum/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif)
Originally Posted by twitch579
Amazing how far behind Ford is when it comes to making power. All of these cars comapared the same, the 350z makes about the same power as the Stang with 2 less pistons. Ford sucks.
.
#25
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 940
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://my350z.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
ACTUALLY ive owned a 2000 GT mustang and it was the biggest POS ive ever owned. And its 4.6 V8 made a measly 260hp/300Ftlbs.
So your argument over there 2 pistons are worthless is pretty weak. 2 more pistons for 24 more FT lbs??
Yes they feel more torky, but most of that tork is wasted as to the car cant hook work **** with stock tires. I actually had a 373 gear in mine along with a CAI, those were my ownly mods done to that car, after the gear install it never hooked ever again. I even had aftermarket rims with 285's, it didnt make a bit of difference, spin city. Plus the car just sucked, it had soooooooo many rattles and the doors felt like they were about 2 fall off everytime I closed them.
Not to mention all the things that went wrong before I HAPPILY got rid of it at 79000 miles.
Exploded Plastic Intake Manifold, Antifreeze everywhere, ruined all my pulleys. Ford did not warranty even under warranty!!!!
AC broke twice, entire system had to be replaced.
Motor mounts broke twice, all had to be replaced 2 seperate times.
02 sensor had to be replaced.
2 oil switches had to be replaced twice 20,000 miles apart.
Clutch went at 24,000 miles and was going again right before I got rid of it. Second clutch was a FORD racing clutch.
Varios oil leaks.
Car ran like ****, idle was all over the place, no tune-up helped it. Would stall out at lights in neutral for no reason.
Power drivers seat broke 2 month I had it, was stuck in same position forever.
I would never buy a ford Product ever again. They can keep there **** *** V8's that make **** power to me if u cant drive the car hard without it breaking.
If there was a Nissan V8 in the Z it would be ruler of all.
Even the Cobra Sucks, takes a Supercharger to make the same power that chevys making with a single cam motor.
The Z runs with the Mustang with 2 less pistions, thats a no brainer to me.
So your argument over there 2 pistons are worthless is pretty weak. 2 more pistons for 24 more FT lbs??
Yes they feel more torky, but most of that tork is wasted as to the car cant hook work **** with stock tires. I actually had a 373 gear in mine along with a CAI, those were my ownly mods done to that car, after the gear install it never hooked ever again. I even had aftermarket rims with 285's, it didnt make a bit of difference, spin city. Plus the car just sucked, it had soooooooo many rattles and the doors felt like they were about 2 fall off everytime I closed them.
Not to mention all the things that went wrong before I HAPPILY got rid of it at 79000 miles.
Exploded Plastic Intake Manifold, Antifreeze everywhere, ruined all my pulleys. Ford did not warranty even under warranty!!!!
AC broke twice, entire system had to be replaced.
Motor mounts broke twice, all had to be replaced 2 seperate times.
02 sensor had to be replaced.
2 oil switches had to be replaced twice 20,000 miles apart.
Clutch went at 24,000 miles and was going again right before I got rid of it. Second clutch was a FORD racing clutch.
Varios oil leaks.
Car ran like ****, idle was all over the place, no tune-up helped it. Would stall out at lights in neutral for no reason.
Power drivers seat broke 2 month I had it, was stuck in same position forever.
I would never buy a ford Product ever again. They can keep there **** *** V8's that make **** power to me if u cant drive the car hard without it breaking.
If there was a Nissan V8 in the Z it would be ruler of all.
Even the Cobra Sucks, takes a Supercharger to make the same power that chevys making with a single cam motor.
The Z runs with the Mustang with 2 less pistions, thats a no brainer to me.
#26
inquisative
![](https://my350z.com/forum/images/ranks/premier.gif)
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: the Lou, MO
Posts: 1,721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://my350z.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by TEF
C&D's decision to pick the RX-8 as the best sports car in a comparison of four (Mustang, Z, Audi TT and RX-8) seemed rather strange. In fact, I started out be reading the writers' impressions of each car. For the Mazda, it was remarked that the RX-8 could not hold a constant high speed (it had to be downshifted at times) and needed 100 hp more. Also, they believed the car to be useless on the track, but they liked the back seat. The Mustang seemed to ride too harshly and the interior of the Z was cheap despite its great track performance. It would seem that C&D mistakenly judged this group of sports cars with standards that one might use when picking the ideal economy sedan. By their reasoning, the Honda Civic coupe would have won this comparison had it been the fifth "sports" car entered. While I am not saying the Z is superior, I do question the logic used by C&D in this instance when selecting the best sports coupe.
#31
Registered User
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Arizona
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://my350z.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
This comparo was a joke. First off they used upgraded models of every car BUT the 350z. Custom Shelby GT? Audi with all its upgrades and the rx8 touring? Why not use the 350z touring edition instead of the the base model? All their comparisons had to do with comfort over track performance anyways. And the reason the 350z lost so many points was because they gave points for a back seat!! The 350z automatically got a 0 for every section dealing with a back seat. If we are comparing sports cars...why have a back seat criteria?
#32
New Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: small home.
Posts: 10,459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://my350z.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by Sisith
This comparo was a joke. First off they used upgraded models of every car BUT the 350z. Custom Shelby GT? Audi with all its upgrades and the rx8 touring? Why not use the 350z touring edition instead of the the base model? All their comparisons had to do with comfort over track performance anyways. And the reason the 350z lost so many points was because they gave points for a back seat!! The 350z automatically got a 0 for every section dealing with a back seat. If we are comparing sports cars...why have a back seat criteria?
i don't understand why the Z is being compared with other sports coupe...the RSX is a better contender and it would obviosuly be the grand champ.
if the car and driver voted the 350Z as #1 i wouldn't care. i'm just looking at the category they're putting it in which is ridiculous. next thing you know they're comparing a ferrari to a civic si or something...this magazine is FTL. anyways see you all at the RX8 meet/ forum.
#35
![Default](https://my350z.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by davidv
Interesting that Car & Driver would include the Ford Mustang Shelby GT . Its a V8. How about apples to apples. Where is the venerable 6-cylinder Mustang?
#36
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Location: California
Posts: 392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://my350z.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by davidv
Interesting that Car & Driver would include the Ford Mustang Shelby GT . Its a V8. How about apples to apples. Where is the venerable 6-cylinder Mustang?
Your supposed to compare price to price. If i payed 10 dollars for a v6 that has 300hp and you payed 10 dollars for a v8 that has 1,000 HP obviously im one stupid person. I cant go around and say HEY YOU CANT COMPARE ITS A V6 when in reality it was the price not whats under the hood. If you pay good money you better get something good under the hood.
The v6 mustang is in the same price catagory as most 4 cylinder and some underpar v6's and should be compared to that.
Also my dumb friend she read that magazine and she was like hah the rx8 is better than your Z and she already hates my Z and uses that one stupid article to say its better than my car now. I tryed to explain to her then i gave up and said yeah its better, you go buy one lets race and ill melt your face!
#38
![Default](https://my350z.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by michaeljr6
#39
New Member
![Default](https://my350z.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by TEF
C&D's decision to pick the RX-8 as the best sports car in a comparison of four (Mustang, Z, Audi TT and RX-8) seemed rather strange. In fact, I started out be reading the writers' impressions of each car. For the Mazda, it was remarked that the RX-8 could not hold a constant high speed (it had to be downshifted at times) and needed 100 hp more. Also, they believed the car to be useless on the track, but they liked the back seat. The Mustang seemed to ride too harshly and the interior of the Z was cheap despite its great track performance. It would seem that C&D mistakenly judged this group of sports cars with standards that one might use when picking the ideal economy sedan. By their reasoning, the Honda Civic coupe would have won this comparison had it been the fifth "sports" car entered. While I am not saying the Z is superior, I do question the logic used by C&D in this instance when selecting the best sports coupe.
I agree.Reading the article, your impression is they didn't really like any of the cars... sort of picking the best out of the worst. I suspect the C&D staff prefers high-end sports cars for this type of comparison (e.g., Porsche, Corvette, etc.), and they don't think much of the intermediately-priced category.
--Spike
#40
New Member
![Default](https://my350z.com/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by Sisith
This comparo was a joke. First off they used upgraded models of every car BUT the 350z. Custom Shelby GT? Audi with all its upgrades and the rx8 touring? Why not use the 350z touring edition instead of the the base model? All their comparisons had to do with comfort over track performance anyways. And the reason the 350z lost so many points was because they gave points for a back seat!! The 350z automatically got a 0 for every section dealing with a back seat. If we are comparing sports cars...why have a back seat criteria?
C&D never mentions this in the comparison (and, I think they should have).
...Good car magazine though.
--Spike