Did the Z miss it's mark?
 

In Road and Track, they had a overall good review of the Z. They compared it to the Vette and Boxster S. They had the Z and the Porsche equal 0-60 at 5.6 sec. But they say the Porsche has more grunt which equates to 14.0 vs the Z's 14.3 quarter mile. I forgot the numbers, but the Z lost in the slalom too. They also mention that the Z does not squat during launches, and suffers like the 300zx with semi trailing arms (? something like that). I guess this is why we aren't seeing 5.2. Also say the steering isn't telepathic like the Boxster. If only nissan found a way to keep the weight down. The Z weighs about 400 lbs more, and isn't even a convertable. I wonder how much the convertable will weigh, and how it will compare to the Porsche. That would be little more fair. On a more positive note..The Z beat it in braking. I still love the Z, but Nissan made some pretty bold statements and came out a bit short.

Keep in mind the Z costs little more than 1/2 as much
 

how do you figure the Z came up short? Nissan has delivered on every promise they have made. I have every magazine that has test driven the z and have yet to see a negative critique. This includes R&T. The resounding montra I read in all articles is that the 350 is much like the 240, a trail blazing great performance value. That is all I asked of Nissan to build me.:icon8:

Motor trend recorded a 1/4 mile time of 13.9@101 mph
not to bad for a 6 cylinder

I don't the think the Z came up short in any respect.

Great Performance. Nissan always said 0-60 in less than 6...and it's exceeded this by far.
Incredible looks.
Fantastic Value.

There's not another car on the road, even at double the price, that I'd rather call mine.

-Andrew

Nissan came up short?You have got to be kidding.The new Z has created a class all by itself.As far as the "squatting" please re-read the article.It is actually a compliment of the new Z and a critique of the last Z.Nissan made bold statements like what?
1.260 hp then 280(actual 287)
2.0-60 in less than 6 seconds(last time I looked 5.4 in less than 6)
3.Under 30K(Actual base model under 27K)
Please get your facts correct.

Relax!!!
 

I'm not trying to bash the Z. It's still a bad ass car, and I'm still getting one. But wasn't the Boxster Nissans target? Didn't they have a comparo? That's my point. It's more of bashing Nissan for using Porsche to promote it's own car. It looked real nice on "paper" with the stats, and all. But when it came down to reality, the Porsche won (according to R&T). I think they should have kept there sights a bit lower such as an Audi TT Quattro. It's still a status car with decent performance. The Z shines compared to it.

The Z had the same 0-60 time as the Boxster,3/10ths of a second slower in the 1/4 mile(as per R&T) and costs 17,000 less.One magazine said the Z kept right up with the M3 except in straight line acceleration.I think the Boxster was a great target for the Z and if you add value to the equation instead of just hard #'s the Z can easily be compared to the Boxster.Don't forget a nicely equiped Boxster will go for nearly double the price of a Z.

no. Nissan hit a bullseye with respect to their own intentions. The boxster IMO is ugly. If it werent a convertable and ugly, i would have considered it.

No, the Z will not outperform in every category. But, with 20k to spare, you can sink some money into it and have something beat the boxster everytime.

I sold my custom ordered 2001 Midnight Blue 996 earlier in the year to be able to get the Z. I think it represents the best looking, best performance, in that price range +15000.

Super Black Touring

I agree in certain repects that it would have been cool if the car had topped 300hp and been faster or as fast as the 300zx TT. I know earlier this year, many were speculating that Nissan would indeed pull this off. Many fanciful and overly optimistic numbers were floating around. It would have been awesome if it had been able to do 0-60 in 5 flat and a 1/4 mile consistently below 14sec. You are right, instead of being decisely superior to its more expensive competitors (s2000, being a more expensive exception), it is merely comparable and competitive.

Perhaps in a year or two, Nissan will do some fine tunning and get it up a bit to acheive these performance numbers. However, even with these competitive, but not superior, performance numbers, the 350z is one great achievement in automotive engineering and design totality. Lets just all be thankful of that!

:)

Are we forgetting that these 1/4 mile times mean jack ****? Do any of you think these are broken in cars? Also, are we forgetting that most magazines can't drive better than our grandmothers?

I say, lets wait for some real numbers to appear from people taking their Z's to the track. Then lets talk numbers.

Just my .02

In the 350z dealer sales manual the main compitition of the Z is the Honda S2000....they bash that car....they really dont mention others.

How? :confused:

I own an S2000, and am intrigued by the 350Z, but IMO they're going to be in the same performance ballpark. The S2000 has many advantages over the Z, but the Z has a lot more torque and luxury items.

:icon6:

hehe...this should get the thread charged up again. Of course, you are right, they are very comparable in raw performance numbers. There are big differences in the way each car achieves its performance, though. I bet a bunch of people will soon chime in about how superior the Z is to the s2000. It is human nature to defend one's most prized possession (correction...soon to be prized possession). :D

Just to clarify, I don't want to start a pissing contest, just curious as to how Nissan is putting down the S2000. I wouldn't be here if I didn't like the Z, and I'll try to test drive one as soon as I have the opportunity, despite my current infatuation w/ the S2000.

Re: Did the Z miss it's mark?
 

Welcome to Marketing, may I help you? :)

Yes, the Z sucks, I think I'll go out and buy... a Hyudai Tiburon?

Re: Did the Z miss it's mark?
 

Do your homework. Nissan compares the Z to the Boxster , not the boxster S so I don't think they came up short or 'missed their mark'. Also, I could be wrong but I believe the Boxster has a telescopic, NOT telepathic steering wheel. But if Porsche has developed a cosmic form of non-verbal communication with the car, then the Boxster takes it hands down. Duh.

ciscomike, please post your thoughts on how the Z compares with 996 after you take delivery and have driven it long enough to really exercise the engine. I am very curious as to how these two vehicles compare. In other words, how much more does the extra $40K that the 996 costs really buy you?

My buddy at work has an S2000. It is a nice car.

The interesting thing here is that he always tells me his car's 0-60 time is around 5.0s, compared to our 5.4s. That may be true, however, the original magazine review times for the S2000 are around 6.8s. Some magazine times were in the high 5.xs range. They ended up being way off. The S2000 was much lower. The Z will be the same way.

My point? If we are going to compare the S2000 to the Z, let's compare apples to apples. Car magazine times to car magazine times. Real times to real times. We have the car magazine times and the Z is much faster. We do not yet have the real times, nor will we for weeks or months from now.

:)