350zpower

Ive heard a lot of rumors that the G35c will have all the performance of the Z but with better fit and finish, infiniti goodies (like warranty, service), better amenities, and will cost <= to the price of a comparable Z.

Does this irk anyone else who has a Z. the fact that the G35coupe will have a lower production # then the Z will also make it more rare.

so is this really a case of they get more for less?
nissan tends to do this a lot .. for example the g35 sedan costs about the same as a high end maxima but is way nicer .. and the altima performs better than the maxima and costs less and looks nicer. Could our Z be eclipsed by the G35coupe? Hmmm makes me wonder..

what say you guys?

350zpower

do you really think nissan detuned the engine in the g35c to 280 hp instead of the 287 hp in the Z ? seems like it will cost more to produce two different types of engines -- one for the Z -- one for the g35c

Michael-Dallas

De-tuning could be as simple as having different ECU programs.

Michael.

rep15

Here is my personal opinion. If I were to get a coupe I would spend the added money and get a 330 BMW or CLK Mercedes. Yes, they are more expensive but are true coupes with much better looks. I do not like the style of the g35c. It takes the Z and modifies it just enough to make it undesirable to me. Fit and finish better in the Infinity - yes. I do not care. I want a two seat reincarnation of the Datsun 280Z I bought new in 1978. No coupe will do it for me.

Boomer

I have to agree w/you, I rejected both the M3 and 330iC for the Z. I'm glad I did and it wasn't money, it was the 2 seater sports car I wanted. Like my old 240Z. I read the review in R&T, nice but no sale for me.

MannishBoy

iTrader: (1)

Slightly more restrictive intakes and/or exhausts could easily account for the HP difference. Or, it could just be a marketing thing.

Whatever the HP, if they are that close, the G35C will be probably a couple of ticks slower due to weight.

I'm struggling to decide between the two. The way I've worked it out, I'd have about a $1600 difference if I went with the G35C (over performance Z), and for that extra money, I'd get a longer warranty, leather, Brembos, etc. Probably a better buy, but I still can't make up my mind.

Good thing is, I don't need a car quite this quick anyway. February or March will work.

fr0ng

I like the speed cluster of the Z, and the rest of the interior of the G35c...they need to merge the 2 cars together.

EDogg811

personally, i think the g35 will be the better buy for the average layperson. unless you push your car to the limit on a regular basis, you will most likely not notice much difference between the two, aside from space and ride comfort. other than that, the more "conservative" styling of the g35c will be more palatable for the general mass. the z is cool as a second car, but if you were to have just one car as both daily driver and weekend fun, the g35c is the best of both worlds. the funny thing is that according to mag reviews, the g35c actually has better handling than the z. supposedly, it's due to the longer wheelbase. go figure...

Boomer

Yes, the G35C did handle better on the tests, but it had Michelin Pilot Sport tires on it. They are a lot better than our standard Bridgestone RE 040s. I would still choose the Z because its a 2 seater sports car, not a GT. Somewhere, long ago, I read in a handling article in R&T, C&D, or other mag, I quote, "the single best change you can make to better the handling on your car is to change the tires" . The RE040s are not even close to the Pilot Sports in handling. Look it up in the Tire Rack tests.

drake3

I am in this boat also, trying to decide between the two cars.

I am turning in my '00 328Ci sport coming off lease. Had 2 great ZXs before and trying to order a 350. However, I have gotten used to the luxury features in the Bimmer. I love the sunroof which the Z does not have in either a sunroof or T-tops form. I sure wish it had some kind of removeable top, even a targa would be sweet. Also wish it had the radio controls on the steering wheel like the G35 and the Bimmer. For some reason I have really gotten used to that tiny feature. I won't be taking my next car to the track, but I would like a high level of performance. That makes the Z extremely attractive, but then again, if I need to go to the airport for a trip I can't take the Z because my luggage will barely fit!

I do like the styling of the Z better than the G35. When I look at the G35 it looks to me like someone stuck an air needle into a Z and inflated it making all the curves a little larger.

I can also wait until early next year, but I want to make a decision soon so whichever one I choose I can order it.

Oh well, if this the roughest decision I have to make this year I will be alright!

Drake.

MannishBoy

iTrader: (1)

Heh, the radio controls thing is a bigger deal with me than it probably should be, too. Amazing something that would be so cheap to manufacture into a car in this price range could be an actual relevant factor to my car buying decisions, but it is just one little thing that might help tilt the balance. It is great to just be able to hit mute on the steering wheel to take a call or go through the drive thru, or hit the scan program button to surf the radio without looking off the road or reaching off the wheel.

Yes, I can and will do without that little feature, but I won't like it

Lots of aftermarket head units, though, allow for remotes, and many manufacturers make wheel buttons (although generally clunky).

frayed

Yes, it is a Z+ as you state, meaning Z + 200 lbs!

A few less hp due to intake/exhaust restrictions (reportedly), longer wheelbase, and the added weight make it much less of an enthusiast's choice.

I couldn't agree more. While people tend to overlook this fact, most handling 'shootouts' end up coming down to the shoes the car wears for top honors. Throw on some BFG KD's, Bridgestone S02/S03s, the new Kumho MX's, Falken Azenis and your car will be transformed (unless you drive like a Blue Hair, in which case, just get some friggen aquatreads).

Now, for real fun, throw on some Hoosierdaddy's.

I still find it puzzling that Nissan chose such a shitty OE tire, when they could have really wowed the press by specing some S03's, with no drawbacks except for the stiffer sidewall.

MannishBoy

iTrader: (1)

I would bet the OEM tire choice, like it so often is, was a cost issue. They probably saved a few bucks.

Boomer

I think you're right on t he money(no pun intended) but the 2000 Audi S4 owner who was so vocal in Tire Rack's testing was not the only disgruntled owner in the tests, several other owners were not happy either and I tried to get a tradeoff from my dealer, but I wasn't aggressive enough.

frayed

Probably true, and probably also true that a whole lot of people wouldn't use the whole performance envelope of even the shitty OE tires.

But equally true that good tires will alter the results of closed track testing by the rags, and likely even spirited canyon road tests. For an extra $200 into MSRP, it seems a no brainer to me, especially when other cars come off the showroom floor with kick *** tires, like M3's and S2000's.

Intrepid

I don't like the look of the G35 coupe. That's reason enough to choose the Z over the G35C.