Did the Z miss it's mark?
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.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Keep in mind the Z costs little more than 1/2 as much
Originally posted by sschmuve
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.
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.
Registered User
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
From: Noneya
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.
Charter Member #83
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
From: Ellicott City, MD
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
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
Registered User
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
From: Az.
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.
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 *** 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.
Trending Topics
Registered User
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
From: Az.
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.
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,253
Likes: 0
From: Sun Diego
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.
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.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
From: Palm Beach Gardens, FL
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
Super Black Touring
Guest
Posts: n/a
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!
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!
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 806
Likes: 1
From: Gainesville, Florida
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
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
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
From: Austin, TX
Originally posted by InternetABYSS
In the 350z dealer sales manual the main compitition of the Z is the Honda S2000....they bash that car...
In the 350z dealer sales manual the main compitition of the Z is the Honda S2000....they bash that car...
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.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by Chris S
How?
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.
How?
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.
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).
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
From: Austin, TX
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.
Registered User
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
From: siphonband.com
Re: Did the Z miss it's mark?
Originally posted by sschmuve
Nissan made some pretty bold statements and came out a bit short.
Nissan made some pretty bold statements and came out a bit short.
Yes, the Z sucks, I think I'll go out and buy... a Hyudai Tiburon?
Last edited by nizl; Aug 17, 2002 at 10:46 AM.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Did the Z miss it's mark?
Originally posted by sschmuve
I still love the Z, but Nissan made some pretty bold statements and came out a bit short.
Also say the steering isn't telepathic like the Boxster.
I still love the Z, but Nissan made some pretty bold statements and came out a bit short.
Also say the steering isn't telepathic like the Boxster.
Registered User
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 766
Likes: 0
From: Northern Virginia
Originally posted by ciscomike
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 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
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 607
Likes: 0
From: Colorado
Originally posted by Chris S
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.
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.
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.