Regarding the solution to the problem:

These cars have a few issues related to the amount of caster in the front end. In my opinion, the problem will continue to exist until a way to adjust caster is implemented.

A few things to note...

1. The amount of caster most of these cars have is a lot compared to other passenger cars, even sports cars.

2. The allowed caster range specified by Nissan is very large considering the supposed/expected quality of the vehicle. Most cars in this class do not allow such a large spread from min to max.

3. The allowed cross caster specified by Nissan is very large, again, considering the supposed/expected quality of the vehicle. Cross caster is the difference in caster from the left to the right side. The typical passenger car allows only half as much cross caster.


You might be wondering why these points are significant. They suggest that caster adjustment, allowing enough movement to a less positive setting, would be the solution. Well, as I demonstrated at my hearings, excessive caster is one of the most likely causes of 'heal-toe' tire wear. I won't go into detail about this, but it is true as shown by several sources including alignment shops.

Sidenote: 'Heal-toe' wear is the type of wear I'm seeing on my car, and I believe is what others are actually seeing. It is not 'feathering' as Nissan calls it. More on this later.

So there is likely too much caster on the cars with the problem. This could be considered a design problem, as even with fixed alignment the problem wouldn't exist if they had designed less caster into the car. Also, it seems that maybe Nissan allows such large ranges to account for production tolerances. Why would they need to do this? There's NO CASTER ADJUSTMENT. By making sure most cars fall into their specified ranges, it prevents people like me from coming up with a bulletproof case by showing the fixed alignment to be out of range.

Nissan is pulling a lot of tricks here, making the real problem seem to not exist at all:

1. They call the problem 'feathering', which is a problem that is normally caused by incorrect toe settings. Its no coincidence that they call it 'feathering', as the toe adjustement is the only one available. If they called it by its true name, it would be obvious that they couldn't fix it with a simple alignment since the parameter that needs to be adjusted is not adjustable!

2. They "step up to the plate" (as the NNA rep kept repeating at the last hearing) by extending the warranty on the tires to 24 months from the original 12 months. Well guess what....in many states the Lemon Law statute of limitations runs out by that time. By taking this step, Nissan has pushed many trusting owners out of the Lemon Law period, and after that the owner has no recourse. Nissan says, "sorry, your tires are now out of warranty" even though the problem persists. And the owner is left to pay for this out of pocket now.

3. They start putting these 'new' RE040 tires on problem cars. To make a long story short, if you have these new tires on your car, then it will never show 'feathering' as it is to be checked by Nissan's latest TSB (April '04). This is because the measurement of the 'feathering' is to be done strictly on a certain portion of the tread blocks. What a coincidence...that portion is the portion that has now been modified to be solid rubber. It can't 'feather' there! It can still develop the abnormal wear patterns, but they avoid having to replace the tires because they don't show 'feathering' by their Nissan's definition. Nissan reps claim that Nissan didn't initiate the change to the tire design. I can't say for sure, but its quite a coincidence if Bridgestone decided to do it without any prodding by Nissan.

4. Nissan makes claims to many owners about the life expectancy of these tires. Numbers range from 5000 to 8000 miles as claimed by Nissan. Bridgestone says they sould last at least 15k. Why is it that this car should only get a half as much life, or less, out of the tires?

5. The alignment parameter ranges allowed by Nissan help to cover up the fact that a lot of these cars have really screwed up alignments. If your car happens to fall outside of the ranges specified by Nissan, then its easy to show an irrepairable fault with the car. But, since they allow such wide ranges, its easy for them to say "hey, there's nothing wrong with the caster or the alignment...its all within our specs".


Anyway, I just moved so I had all this on hold for a bit. I think I'm now inspired to further pursue this. I did manage to find a couple LL experienced attorneys that I think can win this case if its possible. By the way, for those that don't know this: In Virginia (not sure about other states), the Lemon Law statute of limitations is extended if you go through an informal dispute resolution process, such as the BBB program. You get 12 months after the manufacturer's last action in the dispute.

 

Good right-up SteveZ and GaryK. Has anyone compared the caster specifications between a Z and a G35c? That could eliminate this particular parameter, as I've never heard of a G35c having heel-toe wear. SteveZ, do you know what the alignment specs for the G35c is? It would be helpful compare the target alignment of the two vehicles.

I'm about to install some hotchkis springs, and will keep an eye on the effects that has with wear. I am quite doubtful that it's going to effect heel-toe wear, as it can also be the shocks. I figure if I change one thing at a time with about 10k miles between each change, I will eventually be able to pinpoint the culprit. But, by then, we might all be dead.

 

The specs are close to that of the Z I believe, with the G calling for a little less caster for 18 inch wheels. However, the more important information is the actual values that both the Z's and the G's have. I doubt we'll ever have access to the data needed to make a determination here, but if the G's tend to come out of the factory at the lower end of the range of caster, while Z's tend to come out at the higher end of the range...that would explain the lack of problems on the G's.

 

GaryK great post. I had mine replaced at 5K miles, now have 10K on my Z and no the same amount of heal toe/feathering over the last 5K miles, figure I will get 10K-12K before the roar is back. They did not replace mine with the new style tires when mine were replaced. Figure I will get a new set of front tires before my extended tire warranty runs out (I drive around 10K miles a year). Figure with the new style tires I will get 15K miles before I need to replace. That means I should have around 30-32K miles on my Z and it will be a little over 3 years old before I need to pay for any tires and by then I will need a complete new set. I am hoping that by that time there will either be a "fix" or that the tires that I replace these with will get me 15K-20K miles. I can live with replacing fronts every 15K-20K miles and rears every 30K miles.

 

I seem to recall having read quite some time ago that the Z and G35 actually don't have the same suspension components. Don't know how true that is, but I have seen it in writing.

 

Good tire info with pictures.

http://www.toyo.com.au/tech_info9p1.html

 

Based on tech_info9p1 and Toyo's definition of feathering, we got it. I love remedy #3: Reduce turn-in speed when cornering.

 

I agree, that's what I had at 5K miles when Nissan replaced my front tires. Problem is they replaced with the same old style Brig's, figure I will get the new style at the next replacement which based on wear should be right at 15-20K miles right before the extended tire warranty runs out

 

Interesting. What I am experiencing is indeed "feathering" caused by toe-in and not "camber-wear". This is consistent with Nissan's claim.

 

Same here and after the tire replacement and realignment the new tires are not feathering at the same rate, example 5K miles on new ones and should be ok for another 10K miles. The problem is that we have a sports car, soft performance tires and you can't rotate them. What can we expect? With these conditions with a aligned Z I think 20K miles out of the fronts would be great. The new designed tires with the solid outer edges should help. Personally I don't think Nissan lied to us it was an alignment/tire problem and the did the right thing with the extended warranty. JMHO

 

Nissan has consistently lied, withheld the truth, mislead, whatever you want to call it. They have failed to belly-up to the bar and deal with the problem. Their increased warranty (only on 2003s) has been called a bandaid, and that is entirely correct. When I bought my car (a 2004), I had thoroughly intended to drive it 60,000 miles, or more. Now, with the prospect of either new fronts every 5-8,000 miles or putting up with that gosh-awful roar for perhaps 10-12,000 miles, I'm thinking seriously of bowing out. Mine is one year old this week and have 2,750 miles on it and I had to have the tires rotated (X) and an alignment last week. You wouldn't believe the **** and bull story my dealer gave me, doing his best not to admit to feathering.

 

Why are you bitchin, at the rate you add miles to your Z you will have to buy front tires every 4 years

 

What the hell? I asked the dealer before I bought the 2004 Z if the issue had been resolved. They told me yes.

Well today I found out that my factory tires with less than 15k miles are almost worn to the belt on the inside while the outside of the tire is worn only 8/32!!!

The Nissan dealership told me I need an alignment. Do most cars need an alignment after 7 months on the road?

Took the Z to get another opinion. The guy looked at the tire and said yes, that wear is caused by an alignment problem.

So I guess my question to Nissan, is there some defect in the Z that mimics a bad alignment or are most of the people here just hitting a lot of potholes???

Anyway, I'm calling 1-800-Nissan1 tomorrow to let them know this 2004 Z owner isn't too happy!

 

First, what WNC350ZR said.

The point is, at the rate I add miles to my Z, I shouldn't have to buy front tires for 10-12 years.

If I put miles on my Z like I put them on my pickup, I'd have to buy new tires every year. That ain't right.

And, besides, once that roar starts, it doesn't matter how often or seldom you drive, it's the *****.

And, even that's not the point. Nissan has been, at the very best, disingenuous in the way it has dealt with the problem.

There is no difference in the problem on 2003s and early 2004s.

 

Ronny it ain't perfect and it ain't terrible. I've owned several sports cars through the years NSX, 911's etc. normally replaced tires every 12-15K miles. On the NSX couldn't get over 10K miles out of the rears. I hope this is the least of your problems.

 

i wonder how many people who post on here work for the nna quality control dept. and post on here disputing problems with the Z. i'm sure they have someone monitoring certain complaints.

 

also i have recently submitted many requests to several tv stations requesting an investigation into this story. i gave them some information and the amount of concerned consumers about safety and complaints that nissan brushed off. i went as far as name dropping the firestone ford explorer fiasco to shed some light on our concerns. i will post info if i ever get any response from anyone.

 

I have to agree with Pit Bull in many respects. A rear wheel drive sports car such as the Z is optimized for performance more so than value. This is why the front and back tires are two different sizes. The result is not being able to rotate the tires as you would on a passenger car or truck to maximize tire life and even tire wear. Any tire on any vehicle will likely wear abnormally if not properly rotated/inflated/ or aligned. Wide low profile ultra-high performance tires are even more susceptible to this.

The fact of the matter is performance cars eat tires. The Honda S2000 is worse than the Z in many respects. None of those guys are b!tch!n’ about their cars. They love them because many of them are thru-and-thru enthusiasts. Tire life of 10-15k mile is not unusual for an aggressive S2000 driver.

Now does this mean Nissan does not have a problem? No. Many cars were leaving the factory misaligned. And some people have outrageous tire wear issues that they swear they haven’t been able to resolve. And this appears to be related to something other than “toe-in” or “toe-out” feathering that most other owners are experiencing and getting corrected with a GOOD alignment. These people have a real problem. But my take is they are an exception to what most other people are experiencing.

Bottom line is, ownership of a performance car is more expensive and requires more attention than the run of the mill passenger vehicle. Expect to perform alignments and expect to only get 15-20k miles out of the softer ultra-high performance tires.

 

Thanks, it rates pretty low.

Actually, I am pretty laid back when it comes to mistakes. I just have trouble when people (companies) fail in their basic obligations, in this case correction of poor engineering and failure to communicate.

 

Bottom line is, there are hundreds (or more) 350Z drivers out there who would jump up and down if they could get 20,000 miles out of their fronts; or even 15,000 quiet miles.