Hey Canada,

You are going to have to open a complaint number with NNA. Go to your dealer and show them the wear patterns on the tires. If they can not see problem. go to your SM and then the district SM. Don't be passive or submissive. You should be the head of the spear coming down from Canada against this problem. Kind of like an alliance?

 

From zeelee: About 1 hr and 15 minutes. They say two hours when you wait for it but it doesn't take that long.

And they did switch the tires, easy to tell.

 

count me in as well, thi isnt the fisrt issue they were reluctant to fix!

 

What is feathering ? Also not being a past sports car person what other cars should it be compared to as to the smoothnest of ride. I'm a pre-order and was told that it should ride like a 500 series Beamer. It doesn't !!!

 

read the complete thread then you'll know what feathering is.. there is a picture posted on page 4 I believe..

 

LOL. If it rode half as nice as a Corolla, none of us would complain!

 

Here's a quick question, are any G35 owners getting this too, especially the Coupe as it's the closest relative to the Z? I'd be curious to find that out. I know they have a longer wheelbase but generally they're the same. But the key is that they have the same suspension pieces, just different springs and dampers. Also they have different tires which removes that part of the equation. If they're getting it too then it would point to a problem with the suspension itself (control arms etc..).

As a second question, does anyone here know what causes feathering? I've never seen that happen before. My brother's a service rep and he's never seen anything like that either. My guess is that there's something in the alignment that's off and since there's almost no adjustability in the front end of the Z there's no easy way to fix it.

 

Two cars can have the same suspension but be aligned differently and cause feathering in one but not the other.

 

So then does anyone know if the G35C factory recommended front alignment is the same as the Z?

 

Doesn't the G35 Sedan have the same front suspension as the Coupe as well? And the Z? Why would the 2 Infinitis not have any trouble and this feathering is happening to the Z?

Do you or anyone else, know if the alignment specs on the 3 cars are different and why?

The only information I can contribute is my 91 MR2 Turbo was a rear drive mid-engine with a lot of negative camber. It wore out the inside tread of my rear summer tires in 20,000 miles. I was incensed and got new tires from Toyota. It happened again and I got another new set of tires for the rear. After 40,000 miles, Toyota refused to give me new rear tires.

I went to my independent tire/alignment specialist and he put on camber kits in the rear and adjusted my camber from 2.0 negative to .5 negative degrees or inches(?). My tire life was great, but my razor sharp handling was gone.

Now the Z is a front mid-engine design with rear drive, does Nissan have a much more aggressive, maybe too aggressive camber setting, unadjustable, just like my MR2, to give the Z its razor sharp handling? If the G35s have a milder setting and different tires, is that because they have Touring settings rather than Sports Car settings like the Z, as Nissan defines the two orientations? Would it then follow that the over-aggressive camber and maybe toe too, would result in the OE tires feathering at very low mileages? My bias, of course, is the 040s are crappy tires with an unacceptable wear rating UTOG 140 and should never have been the OE tires for the Z anyway.

I know am just speculating, but I do know more aggressive suspension settings can improve handling enormously, but shorten tire life considerably. Had I been more enlightened, like learning from this site and others, I should have been much less disturbed, if at all, about the wear on my MR2 and kept the handling by just buying more tires with harder tread compounds, which I did at 1600 miles for the Z.

The Z is different, eating tires at a much too rapid rate, even with an aggressive camber setting. It would seem to me a combination of OE tires with poor wear characteristics and aggressive alignment settings could be the problem. So, if I am right, speculation only, it would seem us preorders, are in limbo while Nissan searches for the least expensive fix for them to "FIX" our cars. You racers should know because you make constant changes to your cars to get the best handling you can for every racing venue.

What fix is the least expensive for Nissan to use on our cars? I vote for adjustable camber kits. What would you or anyone else vote for if it would be our lasting fix?

Caveat: This is pure speculation and may be miles away from correct, but thats why we have this forum isn't it? To learn and share ideas? BTW, I don't have a problem with Nissan seeking the least expensive fix at all; we want them to stay in business to build and maintain our cars, don't we?

Boomer babble

 

Boomer,

I keep asking this question. If the service bulletin covers vehicles built BEFORE Sept. 19, 2002 - what did Nissan do different to the vehicles built AFTER Sept. 19, 2002. Could therein lie the answer?

 

It seems logical to me, but what was it and how expensive would it be for Nissan to retro-fit our cars with the running change? Did they alter the specs on the a-arms to reduce the camber? And the toe? If you use my assumtions, then camber change may be the solution. If it is, then new a-arms, camber kits, less aggressive alignment specs would seem to be running changes they could make.

In the end, they have over 8000 cars to fix, at least, and maybe more. The expense could be damn high anyway you look at it. In the end, they must do it, or risk such adverse publicity, it'll cost them in sales and customer loyalty. If my car isn't fixed, I'll never buy another Nissan and I've bought 5. Many others who have bought Nissans over the years have said it in print on this site and others, they will do the same. We'll see.

 

For the record, I want to say that I have bought Nissans since 1972, and my next car purchase will most likely be another Nissan - the Murano, despite this problem on the Z. I am a proud (& loyal) Nissan customer and believe in giving Nissan time to come up with a proper fix. Despite the problems noted here, I think the Z is an exciting and fun car with a lot of performance for the value. First year production cars are more susceptible to problems being discovered and fixed, but the uniqueness and attention that having a new shape and style on the road outweighs (for me at least), the risk of problems.

Others may not agree, but this is how I feel. I believe in the long run, Nissan will do the right thing.

 

My understanding from the Nissan rep was that the first few months the built cars with toe out, which mine was and the alignment brought the toe in, mine was a July build.

The problem is that I still think we need camber adjustment because whilethe right was ok at -0.8 the left was just in limits at -1.3, actually the limit is -1.33 the minimum is +0.17 and the nominal is -0.58 so both of mine are toward the negative end.

In the rear it is interesting as they have different camber settings depending on the wheel size, so guys that went to 19 or 20 have no idea what their camber should be other than guessing.

 

I think Nissan will do the right thing, also. They can't afford not to, if they wish to keep many of their most loyal customers. Like you, I bought a 1972 240Z and loved it. In spite of its problems, the 350Z is one of the most exciting cars I've ever driven. I have no immediate plans to sell, trade or otherwise get rid of my Z.

However, that may not be true of others whose first purchase of a Nissan is the Z. They are becoming more and more impatient with the delays in correcting serious problems. I don't care about the infamous bounce or poor tire choice, these things happen with a new car, as you have stated and I agree. I have changed the tires at my own expense, and if need be, the bounce can be dealt with in that fashion also.

My biggest problem lies with the alignment that has eaten and is continuing to eat away at the OE tires, as you have shown in your own pictures on this site. I can't just sit and wait forever and replace non OE front tires I have paid $500 a pair for and watch them suffer the same fate as the OE tires. Many of us have already replaced the OE tires with much more expensive tires.

Will Nissan replace those tires? I doubt it. I think they will replace or rotate the OE tires only, because that is their policy. We can't wait forever for Nissan to fix the alignment, or the cars value will drop, in my eyes, if I have to dig into my own pocket for new front tires, maybe more than once, I only have 3000+ miles on my car.

BTW, you have not commented on my speculation about the origin of the alignment and how to fix it, it would be helpful if you would. I know your connections with Nissan are better than 99.9% of the rest of us and your comments to the alignment fix would be very helpful. Your insight and input would be valuable to me and others on this site.

All I want is a car that will not add expenses above and beyond my car payments and reasonable maintenance costs. I know Nissan can do it, I have had 4 Nissan cars because they were very dependable and, if properly maintained, will last for many years. Your own 240Z is living proof of that fact. We/I would be very grateful if you could help us with Nissan and show us some light at the end of the tunnel for a lasting fix for our cars.

Respectively yours, Keith Hammer aka Boomer.

 

Boomer, great thoughts. Here's my 2 cents.

If they altered the A-arms, would we see a new/different part number?

Why such a specific date? I'm VIN 6616 and like you, have the heel/toe wear on the outside edge. My production date is listed as 10/02. I don't buy into the Sept date.

On another note, does anyone know if all the Z's are being built at the same plant? (Seventh position from the right in the VIN). My plant is T, not sure what that translates to. If they're being built at different locations could we have manufacturing error?

Just speculating...

 

On the a-arms, parts change numbers did not make a difference w/the springs, so I struck out there, the a-arms may not be changed either.

The significance of the date is not known, by me at least. I have e-mailed Nissan at their nat'l website and specifically asked what running changes in the build process were made to 2003 350Zs as a result of the TSB that uses the Sept. 19th date. I told them to please not refer me to Nissan's Customer Relations Dept. because it is an Engineering question, not a Customer Relation one. I sent it yesterday, so I'll see who they refer me to, if anyone.

The only plant I know is Oppama and I have a T in my VIN, also. It stands for Oppama, I believe. I really don't know if there are other plants producing Zs or not. I am feeling like a mushroom for my trouble to ask pertinent questions, but I am asking because I want information and I don't care if they are stupid or not. The answer may lead me to the next question.

 

Everyone experiencing this problem now or in the past...
PLEASE POST on THIS THREAD
so we have a complete list. Nissan Dealers are acting like NNA and Nissan Technical have no idea that this is as big an issue as it really is.
The thread is only for VIN, location and when you reported the condition to your dealer.

Please Post!!!

 

count me in 2

 

Okay -- I have not bought a Z yet (I have an original 240z from '72) but am considering a 350z. I read this thread and was very concerned. I called NNA. They gave me the party line about the "toe-in" problem being addressed in a service bulletin and assured me that this would not be a problem in the newer production Zs. Since I am not an expert with the VINs on these cars, can someone tell me if this is just a line or if the problem is fixed with the new production cars.

If not, I can continue to hound "Steve" and NNA and let them know that people who have not bought yet have serious reservations.

What do you think?