370Z photos
11-18-2008, 11:18 PM
#41
first blue pic = ugly m3 blue
but the one of the headlight is SICK blue
but i just dont think that this cars shape flows, it makes the 350 dated but just doesnt have that start to finish look
its cool here and cool there but its just unfinished i think.
reguardless CANT WAIT FOR AFTERMARKET KITS
although i wouldnt put one on a 350 it might save this car
but the one of the headlight is SICK blue
but i just dont think that this cars shape flows, it makes the 350 dated but just doesnt have that start to finish look
its cool here and cool there but its just unfinished i think.
reguardless CANT WAIT FOR AFTERMARKET KITS
although i wouldnt put one on a 350 it might save this car
Last edited by quietkilla6; 11-18-2008 at 11:20 PM.
11-18-2008, 11:42 PM
#42
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: SoCal
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-18-2008, 11:44 PM
#43
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: SoCal
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
first blue pic = ugly m3 blue
but the one of the headlight is SICK blue
but i just dont think that this cars shape flows, it makes the 350 dated but just doesnt have that start to finish look
its cool here and cool there but its just unfinished i think.
reguardless CANT WAIT FOR AFTERMARKET KITS
although i wouldnt put one on a 350 it might save this car
but the one of the headlight is SICK blue
but i just dont think that this cars shape flows, it makes the 350 dated but just doesnt have that start to finish look
its cool here and cool there but its just unfinished i think.
reguardless CANT WAIT FOR AFTERMARKET KITS
although i wouldnt put one on a 350 it might save this car
zed-er
11-18-2008, 11:46 PM
#44
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-19-2008, 12:00 AM
#45
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: SoCal
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having just seen the car, I totally agree with you. The 370 is the more masculine car. You'll see that when you see both side by side. At the launch, they had a 350 Roadster next to the 370s. The 350 just looked a little too tired - a little too familiar. It's a nice design, but it's time for a change. The 350 is more rounded and soft where the 370 is husky and masculine.
The 370 has an edgier design, mimics both the future (GT-R) and the past (240Z). It's definitely reminiscent of the 350, but is a more modern evolution. I've always been partial to hot hatches and, while the new Z is a hatch, it's still a more refined design than, say, a GTI or something. I think Nissan allowed for wider rear tires by adapting the type of rear quarter design that Porsche uses on 911s. I think they really succeeded.
No doubt that the realities of the current world economy played heavily on the design basics. That's probably why they didn't use a blank sheet of paper and went with an evolutionary rather than a revolutionary design. It's considerably cheaper to make changes from aft of the doors than forward of them. Forward changes require further changes to the engine placement, mounting, suspension geometry and components, crumple zones - quite a lot. Chopping off some length from the rear aft of the doors is the easiest path. That probably tied the designers' hands somewhat.
I still think the resulting design is well carried out. I liked the car before I saw it. I love it after seeing it.
Of course, not being a 350Z owner, I come into this without any expectations or biases.
Check out the Cayman forum at www.caymanclub.net and you'll see the comments about the new Cayman could easily be substituted for the 370, as well. It's human nature to not want change or to want to hold on to what we've already got.
Give the car a chance. You might just like it.
zed-er
The 370 has an edgier design, mimics both the future (GT-R) and the past (240Z). It's definitely reminiscent of the 350, but is a more modern evolution. I've always been partial to hot hatches and, while the new Z is a hatch, it's still a more refined design than, say, a GTI or something. I think Nissan allowed for wider rear tires by adapting the type of rear quarter design that Porsche uses on 911s. I think they really succeeded.
No doubt that the realities of the current world economy played heavily on the design basics. That's probably why they didn't use a blank sheet of paper and went with an evolutionary rather than a revolutionary design. It's considerably cheaper to make changes from aft of the doors than forward of them. Forward changes require further changes to the engine placement, mounting, suspension geometry and components, crumple zones - quite a lot. Chopping off some length from the rear aft of the doors is the easiest path. That probably tied the designers' hands somewhat.
I still think the resulting design is well carried out. I liked the car before I saw it. I love it after seeing it.
Of course, not being a 350Z owner, I come into this without any expectations or biases.
Check out the Cayman forum at www.caymanclub.net and you'll see the comments about the new Cayman could easily be substituted for the 370, as well. It's human nature to not want change or to want to hold on to what we've already got.
Give the car a chance. You might just like it.
zed-er
Last edited by zed-er; 11-19-2008 at 12:02 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post