Being a domestic owner myself .... I gotta agree that it will be a close race between the Z and GT. This is asuming that both are stock I would have to give a advantage to the Z. ( ie. more power and lighter)

 

poor driving is a characteristic in all low priced cars. younger teens that tend to muscle their way through a race rather than use some finesse to do it. no skill, they rely heavily on the car to do all the work. Im sure there are a few Z owners that cant drive it(me included since this clutch makes my last clutch feel like a sponge, Im still getting used to it) but thats ok, I will say right now that if I raced a GT right now, I could wave good bye to him, Im still getting used to the feel of this car.

 

no doubt, the GT would probably be more forgiving. while a good driver in the Z could do who knows what. after only 2 months out, I dont think anyone has completely mastered the feel of the Z.

owell, I know Ill have fun win or lose(Ill have more fun winning tho) but Im a fan of easy kills, I tend to pick on ricers in shitty imports that dont respect those that are obviously better then them. you know, like when a civic or a eclipse starts revving at you, you just have to put them back a few pegs. show them that they dont have ****.

 

its fun, i dont take as much pride beating someone who was an even match but atleast was worthy. as I do someone who obviously was misinformed about what engine their car has. I mean, they honestly think they can beat me! HAHA show me atleast as much respect as I deserve or you will go down.

 

My first race was actually against a NOS'ed CRX (or a really highly modded one w/ gauges). We were both going on an onramp, and this riced out CRX with gauges and everything goes up next to me and hits his flashers. This onramp is long, it's like 3/4 mile long so we're at about 30mph and I decided to ignore him at first, but he floors it, leaving peel out marks for like 30 ft or so. I decided to give chase since there were no other cars visible and this was a 2 lane onramp that goes for 1/2 mile before it hits the freeway. The CRX was already 4-5 car lenghts ahead and I floored it as I shifted from 3rd to 2nd. The CRX floored it as well and I assume he hit the NOS button (or possibly downshifted) as he left peel out marks again (now at around 45mph). At first I wasn't pulling very hard but at the top of 3rd the Z started getting quicker and as I shifted into 4th I was able to get alongside the CRX and near the top of 4th was pulling away from him. It was funny though, when I got alongside the civic I glanced real quickly at the driver and at first he had this look of amazement on his face then he gave me a thumbs up as I started pulling from him. I was starting to get onto the freeway at this point and decided to slow down to freeway speeds.

This guy was quick though, much quicker than I thought...

 

awww man, crx's are not something to dismiss easily. the standard mod for a CRX is engine swap, then turbo. the car weighs barely 2000lbs, cost like 500$, and with the proper work can FLY LIKE THE WIND.

and dont think thats all in the straight. at 2000lbs it can corner like a bat outa hell. the downside is that regaurdless of how fast your going, your still drving a 500$ CRX...

most people have them as a second car since their so cheap to buy, and then you just modify them.

 

It all depends on the companies goals. Fast, cheap, high quality cars are not (in most cases) high volume cars. After you understand the concept of manufcaturing in a large setting, you'll realize that unless the car can sell a couple hundred thousand units per year, it is usually not considered *unless* it can share a platform with another vehicle *OR* the vehicle is used as a marketing tool rather than a profitable seller in and of itself.

Nissan is trying to recreate its image with the Z350, and why shouldn't it? The car itself is considered a marketing exercise as much as it is a vehicle to add to the lineup to make money.

Another thing...with vehicles that cost less than $50k or so, manufacturers realize that there will most likely be some tuner aftermarket for the vehicle if it is performance oriented (or even it if isn't - case in point, Civic). They actually sell more vehicles by *designing in* weaknesses that are easily upgraded. The person buying the car says, "I bought my car for $xxx and for $xxx I turned into a machine" - you get the point. If this car's base price was raised and those same parts were added from the factory, there would most likely be leser demand for the product because the buyer is not able to *personalize* his vehicle.

The Z is an interesting vehicle because of its purpose. It was made to bring people back to the brand. I will venture to say that Nissan built the car very well from the factory, and that less gains will be achieved from modification than comparable modifications on a Mustang or LS1 car.

Also, it shares its platform with the Infinity G35, so costs can be further distributed (and profits will mostly come from the G35).

Does this answer your question?

 

First of all, there more than Mustang GT in regular production, from fastest to slower:

Mustang Cobra 390hp, Mustang Mach 1 305hp, Mustang GT coupe, Mustang GT conv, Mustang V6.

The Z can hang with the Mustang GT coupe and the race is up to the driver, The Cobra/Mach1 are faster and the GT conv and down are slower for sure. I know is up to the driver because I lost 3 times from stop with a new GT, but I have heard of Z beating GT's so I guess he was a good driver... and I tought I was I good driver

The fact is that now before I try a Mustang first I check it isn't a Cobra or Mach1 (well, the Mach1 is not out yet

 

Sorry dud, the GT is as heavy as the Z

Mustang GT: 3,241 lbs
350Z: 3,217 lbs

Source: www.cars.com

 

If I understand you correctly, basically the other companies do not want to,"It all depends on the companies goals." Why would building a fast, cheap, quality cars not be in a companies goals?

 

LOL, I never thought of it that way!

 

Well, there are multiple reasons. If I knew *every* reason, as you stated earlier, I'd be a millionaire, but I do know a few.

1. Insurance. Buyers of fast/cheap/reliable cars are typically younger. A car like this costs a lot to insure, and the younger a person is the more it will cost. Additionally, younger car buyers typically don't have a lot of money, and even if they could afford the car, insurance on that vehicle is prohibitively high and disproportionate to the monthly car payment.

2. Volume. Why would a manufacturer *want* to sell this particular vehicle cheaply when they *can* sell it for more money. This is due to production volume. Like I said before, there needs to be a large number of vehicles produced to make it *profitable* - this single word means more to the manufacturers than anything else. Example: GM sells roughly 25,000 Covettes per year. These don't cost much more to make than the Camaros did (maybe a couple thousand - max), but there is not a demand for 100,000 Corvettes, so the price goes up to the maximum that $45,000 / car will support. The GM employee discount on a Z06 is $10,000...that should just give an example on the profit margins on these cars - and they still make money on the sale to an employee.

3. Image. Customers *percieve* quality differently than is the case in real life. Most people would consider a Corvette a higher end car for the middle class, and would consider it well built. On the other hand, a lot of people consider the Camaro a wheezing hulk of iron that requires a mullet and a low IQ to drive (in a straight line). These people don't realize that the car is quite capable both in a straight line *and* in the corners. Hate to break it to you, but many an M3 get taken down at the track by the lowly Camaro. This is besides the point, the point is the car is very similar to the Corvette in both build quality and parts used, but the perception of the buyer is of much lower quality. Any entry level marketing class will illustrate this point fully. Take Rolex vs Timex...both tell time...the Timex is probably more accurate, and has a ton of features. But when you buy a Rolex, you are also paying for Millions of advertising dollars telling the world how cool you are.

To answer your initial question quickly, GM built the Camaro and Firebird - the quickest, best handling, reliable cars that could be had for under $25,000 - bar none. Perhaps the market is unable to sustain such a vehicle (insurance, status, ???), or perhaps GM just sucks and wouldn't spend more than 17 dollars per year positioning the cars in the market as just that: the quickest, best handling, reliable cars that could be had for under $25,000 - bar none.

 

Good kill Just pray you don't run into a Cobra.

 

Cobra's eh? That's if they can stay together while racing

 

I dont feel like reading this whole thread, but the Magazine times discussion is funny. Mag times dont mean crap. They are always off due to the driver. The person testing the car only has a limited time to learn how to launch the vehicle and what the proper shift points are. I like reading magazines, but they arent a good source for performance data.

 

Tell me about it.

They never can seem to get the numbers that GM claims on the Z06.

JLA ENTERPRISES