Head-to-head pics: 05 350Z vs 370Z
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 13,406
Likes: 130
From: MexiCali dodging potholes
Interesting... Thanks for posting those. It confirms what I have been ranting about all along - the 370z is bigger than the 350 in almost every aspect. The people who say it is way smaller are fooled by the very clever optical illusion that Nissan has built into the car - such as that large flat spot on the fenders that I despise so much - a styling cueue from their sentra, versa, and mini-van. Those flat-spots are just a way to break up the very large expanse of sheet metal in an attempt to make it look smaller when it's not. The body panels (Front and rear bumbers and rocker panels are very rounded too so it appears smaller when you are up next to it.
I think this is a result of taking the new FM or whatever platform, which is larger than the previous and trying to strap a sports-car body to it.
Not hating, you 370z fanboys don't need to flame me. I still like it. In fact one of the things that I liked about the 350 was how big it was. Really. I don't want to be driving a coffin on wheels like a miata.
I think Nissan is full of ish again when they say the car height is reduced from the 350. marketing BS once again. I could tell the hood was much taller when I stood net to one. The problem I have with the marketing BS is that when you try to lie about things like weight and dimensions and acceleration, you start to not trust them.
I suppose they did not outright lie, but the say some very misleading things.
"Smaller, Lighter, Faster"
We are seeing the "smaller" aspect in the pics above. Maybe some measurements are smaller, but it's not smaller like a lot had hoped - especially sucks when it has less interior room and less trunk space.
"We were able to remove 200 lbs of weight from the car compared to the 350"
But they were not straightforward with how much weight they had to add back into it!!!
Ooh... and they managed to "reduce the 0-60 by .5 seconds from the original 350z due to the increased power and reduced weight". But what they don't say is that they also used a shorter final drive to get the performance gains because it's not much more powerful, nor much lighter weight.
Oh, and the 350z 0-60 times they were using were from a 2003 350, not the most recent iteration, with the HR engine.
But 90% of the population thinking they are buying a smaller, lighter, faster Z because Nissan said so. I mean it is faster, but I think mostly due to gearing.
I wish they'd just tell it like it is. I really like the fact that it can corner with .97-.99 g's and that it can brake from 60 MPH in 106-101 feet.
They just think we are idiots and will take everything at face value.
Reminds me of the same kind of marketing BS that DSL used to say about cable broadband - "DSL is faster because every person gets their own line and cable customers all have to share the same line". Anyone with any network engineering sense knows that is BS.
Also, with HD cable providers: Cable versus satellite. I heard One of the satty providers talking about their ALL digital content versus is superior to cable's analog content. I don't know which is better yet because they are so nebulous about their details, but we know that signal transmission via any medium MUST be analog in order to transmit. I watched a satty HBO movie on a friends new LCD HDTV and while the main subjects in a scene were very detailed, the back grounds had so much digital dostortion, splotching, and dithering, it was really annoying. Probably some compression algorithm used by the satty cable provider to try to get all that extra signal on an old satellite design. I mean you can't take a satty use for 480i and replace all those channels with 1080p - something's gotta give. evetyaly they'll build and launch new sattys, but that'll be a while.
But I guess marketing perceptions always sell better than reality so I should just forget it.
I think this is a result of taking the new FM or whatever platform, which is larger than the previous and trying to strap a sports-car body to it.
Not hating, you 370z fanboys don't need to flame me. I still like it. In fact one of the things that I liked about the 350 was how big it was. Really. I don't want to be driving a coffin on wheels like a miata.
I think Nissan is full of ish again when they say the car height is reduced from the 350. marketing BS once again. I could tell the hood was much taller when I stood net to one. The problem I have with the marketing BS is that when you try to lie about things like weight and dimensions and acceleration, you start to not trust them.
I suppose they did not outright lie, but the say some very misleading things.
"Smaller, Lighter, Faster"
We are seeing the "smaller" aspect in the pics above. Maybe some measurements are smaller, but it's not smaller like a lot had hoped - especially sucks when it has less interior room and less trunk space.
"We were able to remove 200 lbs of weight from the car compared to the 350"
But they were not straightforward with how much weight they had to add back into it!!!
Ooh... and they managed to "reduce the 0-60 by .5 seconds from the original 350z due to the increased power and reduced weight". But what they don't say is that they also used a shorter final drive to get the performance gains because it's not much more powerful, nor much lighter weight.
Oh, and the 350z 0-60 times they were using were from a 2003 350, not the most recent iteration, with the HR engine.
But 90% of the population thinking they are buying a smaller, lighter, faster Z because Nissan said so. I mean it is faster, but I think mostly due to gearing.
I wish they'd just tell it like it is. I really like the fact that it can corner with .97-.99 g's and that it can brake from 60 MPH in 106-101 feet.
They just think we are idiots and will take everything at face value.
Reminds me of the same kind of marketing BS that DSL used to say about cable broadband - "DSL is faster because every person gets their own line and cable customers all have to share the same line". Anyone with any network engineering sense knows that is BS.
Also, with HD cable providers: Cable versus satellite. I heard One of the satty providers talking about their ALL digital content versus is superior to cable's analog content. I don't know which is better yet because they are so nebulous about their details, but we know that signal transmission via any medium MUST be analog in order to transmit. I watched a satty HBO movie on a friends new LCD HDTV and while the main subjects in a scene were very detailed, the back grounds had so much digital dostortion, splotching, and dithering, it was really annoying. Probably some compression algorithm used by the satty cable provider to try to get all that extra signal on an old satellite design. I mean you can't take a satty use for 480i and replace all those channels with 1080p - something's gotta give. evetyaly they'll build and launch new sattys, but that'll be a while.
But I guess marketing perceptions always sell better than reality so I should just forget it.
The pictures don't lie either
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
From: arizona
based on those pics i like the 350 more. the 370 looks like it sits to high up. the head lights/front air intake/the rear end; all of these are higher on the 370. I want to like the 370. I'm sure with some styling tweaks and refinement it will shine, but for 40K i will take a used cayman s.
I still dislike the front bumper, I'm sure that can be changed. The Rear I am ok with, but WTF is with the opening between the exhaust. I mean it looks like it’s about to take a crap you know.
I have seen lots of the photochops that some have done. There really kick @$$. Supple changes.
I have seen lots of the photochops that some have done. There really kick @$$. Supple changes.
Last edited by cdoxp800; Jan 1, 2009 at 11:46 AM.
"We were able to remove 200 lbs of weight from the car compared to the 350"
But they were not straightforward with how much weight they had to add back into it!!!
Ooh... and they managed to "reduce the 0-60 by .5 seconds from the original 350z due to the increased power and reduced weight". But what they don't say is that they also used a shorter final drive to get the performance gains because it's not much more powerful, nor much lighter weight.
Oh, and the 350z 0-60 times they were using were from a 2003 350, not the most recent iteration, with the HR engine.
But 90% of the population thinking they are buying a smaller, lighter, faster Z because Nissan said so. I mean it is faster, but I think mostly due to gearing.
I read on nissansnews that the base 370z is 95 lbs lighter than a comparable 2008 350z enthusiast. The sports package is a different story, it weighs about the same as the track model.
I wasn't able get performance numbers off nissans website, except 0-60 in less than 5 seconds.
What difference does it make how nissan made the 370z quicker than a 350z. I couldn't care too much if it's 30 more hp, 300 lbs less, or more aggressive gearing. By the way, the final drive ratio on the automatic is the same as before, but the new 7 speed makes it faster than the 5 speed.
Like I said in a much earlier 370z thread, this car is not worth jumping to, coming from a 350z. It is perfect for a first time Z buyer though
Hiz-n-herz nailed it, with his post. This thread and pics just helped my decision of keeping the 350z, much easier. Lately, I've been bored with the 350z, especially after seeing the HR Z come out, and now, the VQ37VHR Z. Right now, I'm content of having the 350z. I will wait for something that's much more appealing coming from a 350z, and the 370z is obviously, not it.
Hiz-n-herz nailed it, with his post. This thread and pics just helped my decision of keeping the 350z, much easier. Lately, I've been bored with the 350z, especially after seeing the HR Z come out, and now, the VQ37VHR Z. Right now, I'm content of having the 350z. I will wait for something that's much more appealing coming from a 350z, and the 370z is obviously, not it.
The 370z looks like a 4x4 next to the 350z. The 350Z looks so much sleeker than the 370z. The 370z just look like someone took a baseball bat to the 350Z and this is was the result.
I know I posted it in the OP, but I want to remind everyone that my Z is about an inch lower than stock. (RS*R Ti2000 springs = .5" and shorter tires = another .5")
However, it looks like the 370 is more than an inch higher than my 350, so...
However, it looks like the 370 is more than an inch higher than my 350, so...
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles
THANX ALOT! i'v been waiting for sum1 to do this comparison. i also did think tht the 370 was gonna be way small, but it looks real good.
Every1 who says that the 370 is ugly or the 350 is better, honestly, i think that u guys say that cuz u guys r a lil jealous. im not making fun, but i used to think the same, now that i dont hav a 350, ...370 FT-f*ckin- W.
Every1 who says that the 370 is ugly or the 350 is better, honestly, i think that u guys say that cuz u guys r a lil jealous. im not making fun, but i used to think the same, now that i dont hav a 350, ...370 FT-f*ckin- W.
THANX ALOT! i'v been waiting for sum1 to do this comparison. i also did think tht the 370 was gonna be way small, but it looks real good.
Every1 who says that the 370 is ugly or the 350 is better, honestly, i think that u guys say that cuz u guys r a lil jealous. im not making fun, but i used to think the same, now that i dont hav a 350, ...370 FT-f*ckin- W.
Every1 who says that the 370 is ugly or the 350 is better, honestly, i think that u guys say that cuz u guys r a lil jealous. im not making fun, but i used to think the same, now that i dont hav a 350, ...370 FT-f*ckin- W.
Sponsor
Works Concepts
Works Concepts
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,029
Likes: 1
From: So Cal
Looks are subjective, so if you don't like it, then there's not much to consider.
In terms of improvement, do you guys really think that 6 years of R&D along with technological advancement won't yield a better car. I sure hope Nissan can build better overall car in this time span.
For me, a car is more than just plain numbers and performance. It's the overall package, the way it drives, the way it feels and all the little things. I look forward to driving a 370Z to see how the car has improved in these aspects. I'm a big fan of the 350Z, but IMO, newer is simply better with today's cars.
In terms of improvement, do you guys really think that 6 years of R&D along with technological advancement won't yield a better car. I sure hope Nissan can build better overall car in this time span.
For me, a car is more than just plain numbers and performance. It's the overall package, the way it drives, the way it feels and all the little things. I look forward to driving a 370Z to see how the car has improved in these aspects. I'm a big fan of the 350Z, but IMO, newer is simply better with today's cars.
