2005 z vs 2007 z
12-06-2008 | 06:44 AM
#48
12-06-2008 | 08:00 PM
#50
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: texas
Posts: 342
iTrader: (2)
Send a message via Yahoo to RobH_350z
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carbon-Z View Post
I was there the same night as SOLO and he never ran a 350z that night. There was another 07 350Z that night that his clutch blew out on him (stuck to the floor) that couldn't race it anymore. U probably ran that one. I also think it was either a white or silver one but not a NISMO. Per the owner of that one, he was running 14.0s all night. This is pretty sad that you are trying to attack him when he never ran you.
looks like you werent there?
I think you may of been talking about me.
I was stock first time to the track and when i did get my first run of the night i got 14.08 best time and the rest of the night i did any were from a 14.1. and loosed to my friends 87 prelude becuase of a stuck clutch peddle.
12-07-2008 | 02:16 PM
#51
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
From: westchester ny
WTF is an auto clutch? You DO realize that an auto Z HAS NO CLUTCH right?
Also, all Z's have a "manual" shift mode on the autos (again not a TRUE manual).
Have you ever noticed that auto Zs are not only slower at the track, but they also dyno (on average) lower? The torque converters eat power up. There's way more loss compared to having a clutch and flywheel.
Srsly, anyone who thinks automatics are more performance-oriented should be falcon punched.
LMAO at the following:
"... or as I call it Tip Tronic" Like you invented the ****ing term.
"... or you can manually shift as you like with out the discomfort of using a clutch" What are you, a girly man? Discomfort? Please. You want discomfort, try my clutch. Manually shift? It's NO WHERE NEAR THE SAME.
"... the auto clutch does not require you to loose power and or time pushing it in" I guess you really don't realize how much power you've already lost due to having an auto. And you must be one slow-*** shifter f you think you're losing time shifting in a manual. The absolutely ONLY thing an auto has over a manual is that you will always hit your shift points perfect.
The fial has spilled over to today.
Also, all Z's have a "manual" shift mode on the autos (again not a TRUE manual).
Have you ever noticed that auto Zs are not only slower at the track, but they also dyno (on average) lower? The torque converters eat power up. There's way more loss compared to having a clutch and flywheel.
Srsly, anyone who thinks automatics are more performance-oriented should be falcon punched.
LMAO at the following:
"... or as I call it Tip Tronic" Like you invented the ****ing term.
"... or you can manually shift as you like with out the discomfort of using a clutch" What are you, a girly man? Discomfort? Please. You want discomfort, try my clutch. Manually shift? It's NO WHERE NEAR THE SAME.
"... the auto clutch does not require you to loose power and or time pushing it in" I guess you really don't realize how much power you've already lost due to having an auto. And you must be one slow-*** shifter f you think you're losing time shifting in a manual. The absolutely ONLY thing an auto has over a manual is that you will always hit your shift points perfect.
The fial has spilled over to today.
you killed the thread when u post this. you don't have to know much about cars to realize the auto z is not better than the manual. I don't know why people continue to make threads about this. I don't know too much about racing nor do I pretend to know but some of the things people say in these threads
12-07-2008 | 05:09 PM
#53
All things being equal...
HR > DE
MT > AT
I myself have an AT DE, so I'm prolly in the very bottom catagory. BUT, there's always a chance for anything to happen, even with all things being equal. Either way, I'm bout to get my car back from turbo install, so I could care less about any of this lol....
later
HR > DE
MT > AT
I myself have an AT DE, so I'm prolly in the very bottom catagory. BUT, there's always a chance for anything to happen, even with all things being equal. Either way, I'm bout to get my car back from turbo install, so I could care less about any of this lol....
later
12-10-2008 | 02:24 PM
#56
well considering the aftermarket on the cars you are way better off on a DE. simply because of its aftermarket avaliability. and sadly the hr's 3.5s are only a 2 year production car wich unfortunatly the aftermarket is extremely more expensive than the pre-07s. buy a 03-06 u can easily twin turbo it or better yet single turbo it for a fraction of the 07-8s. 3800 is the going price for a turbonetics with the utec wich would easily put you in the 400whp + category. for an hr u need a complete stand alone 2k$+ 1k tuning. 9k for the tt kit, 2600$ for install. add the math. HR'S Nuthuggers FTL lol. plus depending on what state you are in u will never run urself into a tt hr since only 2 people sell kits+installs them.
Last edited by zmedic16; 12-10-2008 at 02:27 PM.
12-10-2008 | 09:06 PM
#60
08 will win.
as for the mt vs. at war : it's MT all the way. Less moving mechanical parts = less power-loss. At the circuit track, you get more control over the car.
The only advantage of at over mt is the driver gets to concentrate more on driving without having to worry about shifting (circuit racing). Great way to avoid human error, ie: missing a gear or miss-shifts that **** up the gearbox.
I'd get an MT if i had to buy a Z again.
i bet later on we're going to see threads like:
370z AT stock vs. 08 MT stock ... who will win?
LOL.
as for the mt vs. at war : it's MT all the way. Less moving mechanical parts = less power-loss. At the circuit track, you get more control over the car.
The only advantage of at over mt is the driver gets to concentrate more on driving without having to worry about shifting (circuit racing). Great way to avoid human error, ie: missing a gear or miss-shifts that **** up the gearbox.
I'd get an MT if i had to buy a Z again.
i bet later on we're going to see threads like:
370z AT stock vs. 08 MT stock ... who will win?
LOL.