z461

Anyone else read that Road & Track? They said the G35C is more stable through corners while exhibiting higher slalom speeds and higher grip on the skidpad... This can't all be just tire wear? Did the engineers actually make their luxury sports coupe sportier than their pure sports car??

padam07

It says in the article that :

"And thanks to its slightly longer wheelbase (112.2 in. to the Z's 104.3 in.), the car feels more balanced and stable through corners than the Z, especialy noticeable through quick left/right transitions where the Z's rear end can become a touch twitchy."

I think that they should have but a little bigger differnce in price between the Z and the G35 Coupe. But then again you are not getting any heritige like the Z.

roberto350z

The mitsu 3000gt was always heavily regarded as being the absolute best when mags did comparos back in the day....

just think how rediculous that it. The 3000gt!?!? It weighed like 3700lbs or something like that. Yuck. The mags always noted how planted and solid and non twitchy the rear end was, just like they are saying for the 3400lbs G35c.

my point, there is always more to the picure...they are not saying the G is better. The Z will spank spank spank the G at the track, but yes the G is stable cuz its a fatty. Yes, its weight will offer some advantages, but will also come with disadvantages...


also..F*CK those mags...im sick of em

350zSpeedRacer

No kidding. I'm so sick of car magazines that have test drivers who can't drive and only give you half the real story!!!! I think they're in on it with dealerships now so they can screw people out of money together!!!!!

WashUJon

My 3000GT VR-4 WAS that good. You couldn't feel the weight at all! The car was so solid in the turns and so planted that I made many a passenger almost ruin my seat. I almost never lost any amount of control of that car; not even in the snow! The AWD and 4 wheel steering really overcame the weight of that car and all one had to do was create a bit more boost and the car was really damn fast.

Just my $.02 as a former 3000GT owner. (I have much more that I can say, but that should suffice)

WashUJon

I totally agree with this. A REAL sports car can out-drive the driver. I think these guys are just more comfortable with a safer, more predictable and more oversteering car. Plus, they advertise to the general public who usually values that stuff more than the enthusiast type (most of us).

droideka

Well said. If my Z felt any more stable through 75MPH switchbacks, I'd think I was driving a Cadillac. You can get the Z f**ked up in a turn, you just have to drive it poorly.

I guess the new G35C owners are going to read this horseshit, push their cars beyond their limits and cause a glut of G35C bodywork. I watched it happen with the CL-S when it first came out and that was an arguably safer, FWD car.

rai

Your whole question is inacurate. Just because one car mag said the G35 coupe felt more stable bla bla bla. That does not mean the G can outhandle the Z. You should ask how come the G has a faster slalom etc..

Here's what you do, with 2 cars with nearly the same hp, weight, etc. In order for one car to outhandle another car it has to lap a track faster.

So far we do not have any data. I have a hard time believing a G will be faster than a Z on the track.

WashUJon

The first line of defense with a safe car is the idiot behind the wheel. lol Some people just seem to forget that.

TCL

Outside of the test conditions and the drivers I think the main factors is the tires:

Z with strock Bridgestones = 0.88 g's on skid pad
G32 with Michelin Pilot Sports = 0.92 g's
Z with unnamed Bridgestones = 1.0 g's (at Pheonix testing per RxO).

RxO, please let us know what model Bridgestones were used in that Pheonix test. Thanks in advance.

digerydingo

There is a whole other factor here as well. The guys doing the test drive, drive the car for maybe a day to half a day before they begin their tests. After only this short amount of time to try and get a feel for the car and then write their report. If a mag reviewer says that it feels more or less stable in no way reflects the true performance of any given car.

Personaly when I jump in a car to give it a rip around the track I tend to have more cofidence in a longer wheelbase car as aposed to a short wheel base because it's less twitchy. Doesn't mean that only a long wheelbase car handles better, just that I have more confidence in pushing it. Had they had more time you would have seen the g's of the Z comming up and the things that make the G stable and solid an actual handicap, hindering any further progress.

Michael-Dallas

This month's Car & Driver has an article on how they test cars and how to interpret the data. Just because a car looks good on paper doesn't mean it's better. Some cars are harder to drive to the limit than others.

Don't let magazine numbers bring ya down. Take your Z to a roadcourse and I guarantee you'll have sooo much fun that you won't care if it puts down .88g's or 1.00g's.

My $0.02.

Michael.

2wheelsx2

Just because a car "feels" more stable does not mean it handles better. The Z is probably twitchier to the testers because it is quicker steering because of the longer wheelbase. A Hummer is very stable through the corner, but is a 3 ton truck. Doesn't mean it's faster.

It's always been like that. Nimbler handling = twitchy. It takes an expert driver to drive a fast car fast, but for the average man, an easier to drive car equals a faster car. It's when you pit one against the other on a track with skilled drivers that you can tell which one is the superior car.

z461

OK.. so all I have seen so far from these posts is that "Twitchy is good because it means its quicker?". Remeber, the G35C is only about 100 lbs heavier (i believe) than the Touring 350Z. Guess Nissan should've made the cars further apart, it seems to me that cannabilization is going to be occuring a LOT with the G35C and 350Z... Good for Z owners though, less cars on the road!

D'oh

I recall a few reviews commenting on how the Z understeered at the limit, yet R&T says the G35C is better balanced AND less twitchy? Seems contradictory to me. I think most of the posts have covered quite well the fact that one magazine has said one thing about the G35C, and while that data isn't worthless - it isn't gospel either.

I'll be interested to see how the rest of the reviews of the G35C go.

-D'oh!

Michael-Dallas

IIRC, the 350 understeers intentionally. That is what Nissan wanted and that is why 350 has a 53/47 weight ratio. To the everyday driver, it is easier to control an understeering vehicle than a neutral--->oversteering vehicle. (Consequently, it's more gratifying and rewarding if you know how to pilot a neutral vehicle)

The G35c is better balanced because of the longer wheelbase. Likewise, the 300 2+2 is better balanced than the 300 2-seater because of the longer wheelbase. But that's only marginal to the everyday driver.

As to why the G35c looks better on paper than the 350... read Csaba Csere's column in the last C&D. What he says about magazine test numbers explains alot.

Michael.

z461

The 53/47 ratio isn't for understeer btw, supposedly its part of the FM platform because they want their cars to be "front loaded" so that when accelerating through a corner the car achieves a perfect 50/50 balance as weight goes to the rear (acceleration squat).

350zSpeedRacer

I know it's been said, but I have to agree. Most of these car mags are intended to inform the "everyday" driver, not gear heads like most of us. You have to take everything they say with a grain of salt.

Besides, none of those test drivers impress me with their drving skills, they just can't handle a good car.