Car & Driver reviews production 370Z, now weighs a lot more than expected
12-28-2008, 10:57 PM
#61
Registered User
still on this weight issue eh?
unless anybody is going to be tracking a 370Z
i see no point in speculating about it over and over again like the number
will suddenly get lower...
plus,i say test drive one first to know for sure or not.
Numbers in a magazine mean nothing to me.
unless anybody is going to be tracking a 370Z
i see no point in speculating about it over and over again like the number
will suddenly get lower...
plus,i say test drive one first to know for sure or not.
Numbers in a magazine mean nothing to me.
12-28-2008, 11:50 PM
#63
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Henderson
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"giant difference"? I don't think so. It's moderate at best. A giant increase would have been making it 350hp.
12-29-2008, 12:29 AM
#64
^+1
Nevertheless, 370Z will surely perform better than the 350 both in stock form. Who the fck would build a newer version of a car that's slower than its predecessor? Let's not be quick to judge and later put ourselves into shame. We still have yet to see the real deal - 370z vs 350z at the race circuit!
Adding weight doesn't always mean it lowers the car's performance.
Just to make my point clearer: GTR is a lot heavier than the Porsche GT2 and has 50hp less power but it was able to hang with the mighty GT2.
Nevertheless, 370Z will surely perform better than the 350 both in stock form. Who the fck would build a newer version of a car that's slower than its predecessor? Let's not be quick to judge and later put ourselves into shame. We still have yet to see the real deal - 370z vs 350z at the race circuit!
Adding weight doesn't always mean it lowers the car's performance.
Just to make my point clearer: GTR is a lot heavier than the Porsche GT2 and has 50hp less power but it was able to hang with the mighty GT2.
12-29-2008, 04:40 AM
#65
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 526
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not trying to be a hater. I like the 370 minus a few quirky design cueues. I can get over the design flaws for .97-.99g on the skidpad.
I would say comparing the performance boost from a 350 to a 370 to that of an E46 to E92 m3 is a bit of a stretch. A 414 hp V8 seriously trumps a 333 hp in-line 6. But a 332 hp v6 does not seriously trump a 306 hp v6. It's a marginal increase.
Handling-wise, the 370 is a big step up fro the 350. I just wish Nissan had an engine for the 370 to match it's new handling prowess.
I'll wait for a different engine choice before I trade in the HR z33 for a z34. I just hope the rumors of a v8 in the z34 come true. Then you could compare the 370 to an e92 M3.
BTW, the e46 was a heavier car than the e36 and it did NOT handle better.
I would say comparing the performance boost from a 350 to a 370 to that of an E46 to E92 m3 is a bit of a stretch. A 414 hp V8 seriously trumps a 333 hp in-line 6. But a 332 hp v6 does not seriously trump a 306 hp v6. It's a marginal increase.
Handling-wise, the 370 is a big step up fro the 350. I just wish Nissan had an engine for the 370 to match it's new handling prowess.
I'll wait for a different engine choice before I trade in the HR z33 for a z34. I just hope the rumors of a v8 in the z34 come true. Then you could compare the 370 to an e92 M3.
BTW, the e46 was a heavier car than the e36 and it did NOT handle better.
What I am saying is who cares is the car does weigh more, it handles better (from what we have seen), and I bet it will be a monster at the track.
12-29-2008, 07:34 AM
#66
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Due to the E92's weight gain (of about 200 pounds), it is not a stretch comparison! The E92 (4.6/7) accelerates only marginally faster than the E46 (4.8/9). But the handeling is excellent with the car.
What I am saying is who cares is the car does weigh more, it handles better (from what we have seen), and I bet it will be a monster at the track.
What I am saying is who cares is the car does weigh more, it handles better (from what we have seen), and I bet it will be a monster at the track.
The E46 M3 was a 13.3 (best) at 107 1/4 mile car, and the new one is running 12.7 at 111 or more. I think R&T ran a 13.0 at 111, but others have gotten 12.6/7.
12-29-2008, 08:24 AM
#67
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone here know how much all the parts for the heated seat will weight? If it's significant, I am taking them out to save weight. I never really cared for heated seats.
12-29-2008, 08:26 AM
#68
Registered User
who cares, most people dont know how to race their cars anyway. theyre just embarassing the Z car, lately ive been seeing overconfident dudes with Zs thinking theyre the **** and then get stomped by civics with fart cans. doesnt matter if u have a DE HR or VHR if you dont know how to drive. its so sad to see a Z run a 15 and the next thing the owner does is get mods to improve his time instead of a driver mod
12-29-2008, 08:30 AM
#69
Registered User
same thing was said about the evo x, until they started playing with the motor, which is more responsive to mods than the legendary 4g63. give this motor a chance, the de was nice, hr is even better, now what do you think is gonna be the case with the vhr? wait till people start playing with boost
imho, why ditch a motor that is already great? for an n/a, especially a v6, it kicks some major ***. we can talk talk talk all we want, and believe the sometimes biased reviews, but until i see an actual company r&d it and put some mods in one, ill stand back and watch you guys bicker over a few numbers that will constantly change.
as for 1/4 mile times..it seems everybody dwells on them. let it go, they will always fluctuate. same with road course times. the fact that it is a better overall car than its predecessor is also a plus.
imho, why ditch a motor that is already great? for an n/a, especially a v6, it kicks some major ***. we can talk talk talk all we want, and believe the sometimes biased reviews, but until i see an actual company r&d it and put some mods in one, ill stand back and watch you guys bicker over a few numbers that will constantly change.
as for 1/4 mile times..it seems everybody dwells on them. let it go, they will always fluctuate. same with road course times. the fact that it is a better overall car than its predecessor is also a plus.
12-29-2008, 08:45 AM
#70
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 526
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only if 0-60 is your gauge. As cars get faster and faster, 0-60 is not a very good gauge as it is very difficult to get much faster and alot of the time is due to traction off the line or lack thereof.
The E46 M3 was a 13.3 (best) at 107 1/4 mile car, and the new one is running 12.7 at 111 or more. I think R&T ran a 13.0 at 111, but others have gotten 12.6/7.
The E46 M3 was a 13.3 (best) at 107 1/4 mile car, and the new one is running 12.7 at 111 or more. I think R&T ran a 13.0 at 111, but others have gotten 12.6/7.
12-29-2008, 03:14 PM
#71
Registered User
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SF South Bay area
Posts: 1,145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Due to the E92's weight gain (of about 200 pounds), it is not a stretch comparison! The E92 (4.6/7) accelerates only marginally faster than the E46 (4.8/9). But the handeling is excellent with the car.
What I am saying is who cares is the car does weigh more, it handles better (from what we have seen), and I bet it will be a monster at the track.
What I am saying is who cares is the car does weigh more, it handles better (from what we have seen), and I bet it will be a monster at the track.
I don't care if it weighs more. You don't see much complaining about the GTR's 3,7xxlbs. A 996 turbo is also portly, but no one cares - it's a great car nonetheless.
The 370z will likely waste a 350 HR on the track, but mostly due to improved handling and braking and not so much due to the extra ponies.
12-29-2008, 04:03 PM
#72
Registered User
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SF South Bay area
Posts: 1,145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
16-20 hp is a 5-6 percent increase in hp and is, therefor, negligible. I suppose it would buy you 2mph trap speed. As I said, it took the shorter gearing on the 370 to show any significant improvement in 0-60 and 1/4 mile. Other events, the shorter gearing might slow you down - depends on the track. I despise the 1/4 mile (no offense to those tha like it). I prefer to throw my car around the corners.
I agree that the 370 would win against a 350 with equal drivers (even though bench racing = FTL). I don't know about a giant difference. Define giant. What kind of driving events do you compete in where this would make a difference? 1/4 mile? Autocross? HPDE? Road racing?
I know for a fact that the 370 will out accelerate and out-handle a 350 (driver skill aside). I don't care. I hope 6 years of evolution during Nissan's most successful time has brought about some improvements to their mainstream sports car. I was hoping for a larger increase in power and it did not materialize so I am disappointed.
I am a z-fan. Have been for many years. My only question now is do I eat $10k-$20k and sell my 07 350 to get a 370? Handling improvements seems impressive. Acceleration improvemnts do not impress me since my 07 350 is putting down 296 HP to the wheels on an SAE corrected Dynojet already with some bolt-ons. Sure I could to the same to a 370 and get similar gains. I might do it just for fun.
But for the $10k-$15k loss on my 350, I could sure turn my 350 into a monster for the same $$. If I did not live in cali with the tree-huggers, I would TT my car. But I would hate to get caught and have to spend another $6k to put my car back to stock.
I was hoping the 370 would be much lighter, but so far, we are not seeing any weight loss. Time will tell. We need private owners to take them to a scale just in case we doubt the media. Although more weight does not mean less performance.
I have had a GTR in my sites for a while, but the 370 is nice too. It's just short about 100 HP to sway me away from my 350 or a GTR. AWD would have been nice too. I'd love to se a 400HP AWD z. I'd sell my 350 to buy that.
I don't know why weare arguing. We both like the 370. I just hate it when people think it will stomp an HR 350 - that's just an argumentative thing to say. I also hate it when Nissan states the next z-car will be smaller, lighter, faster. That did not really happen either. At least not in any significant way. Sure, overall height is reduced, but the hood is much taller than the 350 (yuck). The wheelbase is 4" shorter but overall length is only like 1" shorter. So you lose precious trunk space and the car is not much shorter - so why give up the trunk space? The car appears smaller, but it's more of an optical illusion from it being much more rounded.
12-29-2008, 04:06 PM
#73
Registered User
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SF South Bay area
Posts: 1,145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also, you're FI so you should not get a say in NA wars...
I am going out on a limb installing bolt-ons in CA
Last edited by hiz-n-herz; 12-29-2008 at 04:12 PM.
12-29-2008, 04:44 PM
#74
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Scottsdale AZ
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shut up, you're ****ing stupid.
What does age have to do with anything, really? You want to guess my age? How about I tell you? Which would you like? Seems like the only thing you can come back at me with is this "age" thing... Good one smart ***!
What does age have to do with anything, really? You want to guess my age? How about I tell you? Which would you like? Seems like the only thing you can come back at me with is this "age" thing... Good one smart ***!
