Head-to-head pics: 05 350Z vs 370Z
01-02-2009, 07:51 AM
#82
New Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dover, NH
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that appearance is subjective. But there are many people here who own a 350 and many who have either owned previous versions of the car or are considering the 370 as their first Z. The fact that so many point out the same issues demonstrates it's not purely subjective. If it were, the complaints would not be as uniform as they are.
01-02-2009, 11:56 AM
#85
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.
I honestly dont understand your rant. Nissan delivered a slightly smaller, slightly faster, better looking, better braking and better handling Z for the same price you paid for your car. Win win for everyone. Seems like many of you expected a sub 3000 pound, twin turbo charged 370 for the same price. Seems like to me your just frustrated that you bought your car a year too early and want to make yourself feel better.
Last edited by Nexx; 01-02-2009 at 11:59 AM.
01-02-2009, 01:10 PM
#88
New Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: SF, freezing my @ss off
Posts: 2,419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
01-02-2009, 01:25 PM
#89
Registered User
. I admit I am not a big fan of the way the car looks, but I'd take the interior any day plus the new 3.7 liter Engine. Lets just get rid of our 3.5 liter engines and get the new 3.7 liter engine 
01-02-2009, 01:49 PM
#90
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the 370Z looks better. Again, as the OP stated, his car is sitting lower than stock so all the posts about "that 370z looks big" is not apples to apples. Pretty sure if you saw both cars in person, you'd see that the 370z sits lower, wider and is shorter than the 350z.
01-02-2009, 01:59 PM
#91
I think the 370Z looks better. Again, as the OP stated, his car is sitting lower than stock so all the posts about "that 370z looks big" is not apples to apples. Pretty sure if you saw both cars in person, you'd see that the 370z sits lower, wider and is shorter than the 350z.
From the side shots, you can see that the front of the car is "bloated" compared to the 350. As I have said before: I think, because the front end has to wrap around a larger motor, the whole front end is larger.
01-02-2009, 02:00 PM
#92
Registered User
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SF South Bay area
Posts: 1,145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I honestly dont understand your rant. Nissan delivered a slightly smaller, slightly faster, better looking, better braking and better handling Z for the same price you paid for your car. Win win for everyone. Seems like many of you expected a sub 3000 pound, twin turbo charged 370 for the same price. Seems like to me your just frustrated that you bought your car a year too early and want to make yourself feel better.
I just rant to rant
I am just frustrated that it's only marginally faster from an acceleration standpoint and mostly because they changed the FD. I can change the FD in my 07 to make up for that for alot less than the cash I'd lose buying another new car. It's also not necessarilly better looking to me; just different. It would make it easier to justify my purchase of a 370 if it were considerably faster and drop-dead gorgeous.
I buy a new car every couple years these days. Went from and 06 to an 07 and am thinking about a 370 next. The 06 did not put a grin on my face like the 07 does. And the 07 has reacted better to mods than the 06 like I thought it would.
I'd definitely like the synchro-rev match and the improved handling and braking. But I wanted to be wow'd by the next z and I am not. Thus, I rant...
Oh, and I am disappointed and perplexed as to why they did not put the shorter final drive in the 07 when they bumped the redline to 7500 RPMs - now we know why - they wanted to save the performance bump for the next gen z since they were not significantly bumping engine output nor were they significantly reducing weight.
Last edited by hiz-n-herz; 01-02-2009 at 02:04 PM.
01-02-2009, 02:03 PM
#93
Sponsor
Works Concepts
Works Concepts
If you compare the '06 and '07 on paper, there really isn't much improvement, but as you said, there is a definitely a difference when you drive. I could be wrong, but I think this will also occur with the 370Z.
01-02-2009, 02:21 PM
#95
Registered User
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SF South Bay area
Posts: 1,145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But compare them on a dyno and there's a big difference on that paper.
That's because Nissan will NEVER admit they they over-rated the 06 and earlier engines by 25 or so HP. The power curves between the 06 and 07 are drastically different. At some points, the 07 has 40 HP over the 06.
The power curves for the VHR (Which we've seen from the G37) are very similar to the HR, but with less torque and more peak power.
The key will be when people start modding the 3.7l engine and using VVEL to create power instead of using it to create a ruler-flat torque curve. The VHR should have more mod potential than the HR 350.
Last edited by hiz-n-herz; 01-02-2009 at 02:23 PM.
01-02-2009, 03:07 PM
#96
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: kc
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Based on all this $hit talk about 370z, we should probably see very low demand which hopefully translates to lower prices for those who admire the new styling and performance. Please don't prove me wrong and trade in your 350s for 370z.
01-02-2009, 03:08 PM
#97
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: covington, la
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be hard to tell which one is the newer model if you did'nt know any better. The design of the 350 looks just as up to date as the 370. Minus the stupid looking Sentra inspired large flat spots on the fenders and huge truck sized door mirrors.
Last edited by highflyinkilla; 01-02-2009 at 03:12 PM.
01-02-2009, 03:20 PM
#98
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My car is only about one inch lower than stock. I am sure a photoshop expert could raise it up an inch and the 370 would still sit a little higher.
From the side shots, you can see that the front of the car is "bloated" compared to the 350. As I have said before: I think, because the front end has to wrap around a larger motor, the whole front end is larger.
From the side shots, you can see that the front of the car is "bloated" compared to the 350. As I have said before: I think, because the front end has to wrap around a larger motor, the whole front end is larger.
01-02-2009, 03:29 PM
#99
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: DELAWARE USA
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like it
thanks for the compare photos. I like it...and may buy one if a dealer is flexable. I can wait a few months
so what does the enthusaist model 6spd with electro blip BS and sport pkg go for?
so what does the enthusaist model 6spd with electro blip BS and sport pkg go for?
Last edited by OZ-Z; 01-02-2009 at 03:32 PM.
01-02-2009, 03:30 PM
#100
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: covington, la
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, the front seems higher because it IS higher for safety regulations which requires cars to have a certain hood height. That was the main reason for the hood bulge on the 07 350z. Secondly, going by actual tech specs, the 350z is more height. It's one thing to compare stock cars, and it's another to compare cars with modified height not to mention how ever long your car has been sitting on said suspension and has time to settle. Seems like a lot of 350z owners are defense and think their car is better. The same happens every generation as the Z32 crowd did in 2003..... Same song different tune.