07 0-60?
08-30-2007, 09:55 AM
#24
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Cupertino, CA
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JunkStory
I never tested it but I my friend did a couple of run in his stock Automatic 2006 Z and 0-60 was in the low 6's .. much slower than the 5 second of the 2006 MT Z (contrary to original belief)
Just curious, what altitude are you at? I live here near Denver, CO at 1.6km above sea level and cars here run much slower (especially NA ones) due to lower air density.
08-30-2007, 11:22 AM
#25
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,944
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
0-60 is too variable, and not the greatest indicator of performance. The 1/4 mile is the real standard, and that's where I believe the improvements to the 07 really show through over my older, beloved 03.
08-30-2007, 06:29 PM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 5,998
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bumpinjeep
1/4 on the 07 stock are about 13.1-13.3. Better tires will give you better times if that is your sort of thing.
08-30-2007, 09:02 PM
#29
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Jackson County, GA
Posts: 1,384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MC
well also on the 5.1 0-60 on the same day they for 13.6 @ 103 out of that same nismo Z
so im thinking 13.3 would produce a a high 4.9-5.0 0-60
i think 13.1-13.2 on street tires is unlikely
so im thinking 13.3 would produce a a high 4.9-5.0 0-60
i think 13.1-13.2 on street tires is unlikely
My last trip was to a very slow track, for the SE, and I managed a very good time there with a bad DA. Take off the usual 3-4/10ths and add 1-2 mph at the faster tracks here, and I would have run very low 13's in the heat.
I imagine more people will be posting low 13's soon enough, as there just aren't very many 07's at the track really. Once it's cooler, it will come even easier.
08-30-2007, 09:05 PM
#31
Registered User
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 4,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MC
that was before the rev up
the 2006 G's had 298HP vs the Z's 300 so basically marketing. under the new ratings the 298/300 motor went to 293
only the automatics still had the non rev up motor
the original 287 motor i think would come out to be around 279-280HP
the 2006 G's had 298HP vs the Z's 300 so basically marketing. under the new ratings the 298/300 motor went to 293
only the automatics still had the non rev up motor
the original 287 motor i think would come out to be around 279-280HP
Plus 240WHP dynos also prove that much. 15% drivetrain loss = 287CHP. Where as I've seen FX35s and G35s dyno 230-233WHP and that brings them to almost exactly 275CHP. =)
08-30-2007, 09:31 PM
#32
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fl
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MC
the 2007 Z has about 13 more HP than a 2006. Nissan switched to SAE ratings for 2007. so under the same ratings that rated the 2006 300HP it would have been about 313 for the 2007 Z
or to put it another way if the rev up 300HP motor came out in 2007 it would have been rated at 293 not 300. for example go look at the HP rating on the 2007 G35 coupe
or to put it another way if the rev up 300HP motor came out in 2007 it would have been rated at 293 not 300. for example go look at the HP rating on the 2007 G35 coupe
08-31-2007, 12:24 PM
#35
New Member
Originally Posted by davidv
Go to the dragstrip, and post your time slip. Magazine racing is for fairies.
No one is claiming that they themselves can drive a Z to a 5.1 (or whatever) 0-60 time. Similarly, if I post a time slip time of 15 or 16 seconds for the 1/4 mile, does that make the Z a 15-16 second car? (nope...) People here are just referring to quoted numbers, that's all. Nothing "fairy" about that. And unless I'm a billionare and have the money to drive every single car under the sun, I'll have to turst the "magazine racer" when they tell me that they can get a 997 Turbo to do th 0-60 sprint in 3.2 seconds or the Bugatti to do it in 2.8.
08-31-2007, 12:57 PM
#37
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 5,998
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JCat
My best has been a 4.2 in it though.
08-31-2007, 03:32 PM
#38
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JCat
Does anyone know the 0-60 on the 05 35th anniversary Z, it has the rev-up and its the lightest rev-up Z, im sure it would be a close race with the 07
Last edited by KingOfV6; 08-31-2007 at 04:09 PM.
08-31-2007, 04:13 PM
#40
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Modesto
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by KingOfV6
Wow 3.7 seconds, that is of course the same as the C6 z06 vette, I wonder which car has the faster 1/4, damn i bet its really close when this 08 viper hits the road the vette will be head to head for king of the road...that is of course excluding the current 911 turbo which is the fastest.
Does anyone know the 0-60 on the 05 35th anniversary Z, it has the rev-up and its the lightest rev-up Z, im sure it would be a close race with the 07
Does anyone know the 0-60 on the 05 35th anniversary Z, it has the rev-up and its the lightest rev-up Z, im sure it would be a close race with the 07
the 0-60 on the z06 is actually 3.9, and the viper is a hair faster in just about every category, as per the comparison in my C&D for this month.