why can't the new z be a 380Z?
06-17-2008, 08:26 PM
#42
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Puyallup, Washington
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question?
Regarding the 3.8 for the GTR- is this entirely made in Japan, and isn't the z motor made in the US.( I should look at my owners manual for the Z- I guess)
If the 3.8 can be made here in the US, then wouldn't it be possible to have it in the Z.
Regarding the 3.8 for the GTR- is this entirely made in Japan, and isn't the z motor made in the US.( I should look at my owners manual for the Z- I guess)
If the 3.8 can be made here in the US, then wouldn't it be possible to have it in the Z.
06-18-2008, 04:14 AM
#43
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Houston
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by mx48
Question?
Regarding the 3.8 for the GTR- is this entirely made in Japan, and isn't the z motor made in the US.( I should look at my owners manual for the Z- I guess)
If the 3.8 can be made here in the US, then wouldn't it be possible to have it in the Z.
Regarding the 3.8 for the GTR- is this entirely made in Japan, and isn't the z motor made in the US.( I should look at my owners manual for the Z- I guess)
If the 3.8 can be made here in the US, then wouldn't it be possible to have it in the Z.
06-18-2008, 11:30 AM
#44
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 818
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Definitely won't see the VR in a production Z Car. As awesome as that would be it would put the Z in a whole different price bracket. Which has never been Nissan's intent.
06-24-2008, 01:44 AM
#51
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: So Fla
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 2006_350gt
Even though I have a G I do agree with this statement, however the "luxury" company has always had the either equal or better car. Think about it, Toyota had the Supra however the SC models from lexus were right there with it performance wise. Volkswagon and Porsche... no need to say more on that one.
The company will never let their overpriced cars for pompus people (yes I can at times fall under this catagory) be under par compared to their more common vehicles, again as I said before I wish that they would personally I love the Z's and if it was that much better of a performing car I would have one but until it makes that much of a difference Ill keep my backseat
The company will never let their overpriced cars for pompus people (yes I can at times fall under this catagory) be under par compared to their more common vehicles, again as I said before I wish that they would personally I love the Z's and if it was that much better of a performing car I would have one but until it makes that much of a difference Ill keep my backseat
06-24-2008, 07:08 AM
#52
Originally Posted by xplatboarder669
ever seen what an ls1 camaro with a decent tune can do compared to a c5 vette?
Or (history lesson for some) the Grand National vs Vette of its day? (no tune needed) he is comparing stock to stock, you are comparing "tune" to stock.
Notice neither the Grand National or the LS1 Camaro are currently being built.
Last edited by WTX350Z; 06-24-2008 at 07:12 AM.
06-24-2008, 09:25 AM
#53
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: puerto rico
Posts: 2,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you guys observe the pattern with auto makers, it works like this:
Slowly, year by year, add a feature or two that make the consumers say: "Whoa!, check THAT out!; I want that"! The folowing year, the same, and so on. One of the drawbacks of capitalism, but, all in all, I guess it's O.K.
We DO have the option to buy or not to buy, after all! This principle also applies to most widgets (clothes dryers/washing machines, ACs, wireless technology, etc.) $elf-control i$ crucial to keep 'em from luring u$ into it.
____________________________________________________________ _____
Stock 'O4 Touring Coupe/13k!!!/$2O,5OO!!!/FLAWLESS AT!!!/NO feathering!!!
Slowly, year by year, add a feature or two that make the consumers say: "Whoa!, check THAT out!; I want that"! The folowing year, the same, and so on. One of the drawbacks of capitalism, but, all in all, I guess it's O.K.
We DO have the option to buy or not to buy, after all! This principle also applies to most widgets (clothes dryers/washing machines, ACs, wireless technology, etc.) $elf-control i$ crucial to keep 'em from luring u$ into it.
____________________________________________________________ _____
Stock 'O4 Touring Coupe/13k!!!/$2O,5OO!!!/FLAWLESS AT!!!/NO feathering!!!
Last edited by j.arnaldo; 06-24-2008 at 09:28 AM.
06-25-2008, 04:21 PM
#55
Registered User
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depending on the compression ratio in which I do not even know what that is at the moment... 8.5 or 9 considering the size of the motor not too much.. With it pushing around 10lbs of boost with small turbos my guess would be around 250 crank hp...??
06-25-2008, 06:24 PM
#56
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Houston
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vnarang
I wonder how much HP the VR engine has without the turbos...
06-26-2008, 05:37 AM
#58
Registered User
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: UCLA
Posts: 2,470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by in.the.dark
Why? That kind of statement reveals a lack of understanding about engine design. No offense.
06-26-2008, 07:15 AM
#59
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Houston
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vnarang
I'm asking because what if they were to offer the 3.8 in the Z, without the turbos, hence my question.
Beyond that, I've already stated that the VR is not going to be put into high production numbers due to the cost that would add to meet the numbers that Nissan is hoping to sell the Z in.
The VR will not be in the new Z. While a 3.8L VQ would be far more plausible, it's unlikely. Anyone that asks why the VR won't be in it minus the turbos does not understand the market or the engine design principles behind why it's a terrible idea.
Last edited by in.the.dark; 06-26-2008 at 07:19 AM.
07-13-2008, 12:20 AM
#60
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: O'Fallon, MO
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread is full of win.
Everyone abandon the failboat! We lost the paddles!! -_-''
Nissan Hachi...
Hachi Roku is literally translated to 8-6(Eight Six), it's got nothing to do with it being a GT-S. If I remember right Japland never even had a "GT-S" designation, it was the Apex that hit across the pond.
in.the.dark is 100% correct. Lopping the turbos off of a car with a low compression ratio that was built for boost would be...foolish at best.
My favorite post in this thread. GM dropping the turbo regals was the worst and the best thing they ever did. I say worst because they are some bad *** cars, I should know, there's a 9.30's 87 GN sitting in my garage 
. Best, because it was known, and widely known, as the corvette killer. Not exactly what you think of when you think Buick, eh?
The LS1 camaro/firebird was one of the biggest mistakes GM ever made, IMO. They were full of fail. The reason the VQ's, and most import motors for that matter, don't respond well to "bolt-on" mods, is because most of their potential has already been wrung from them. Throw a set of headers on a big block chevy v8, instant 30whp. Do the same on an import and you're lucky to find 10-12whp, accompanied by an annoying rasp.
Blah, I'm done typing...it's bed time.
[/rant]
Everyone abandon the failboat! We lost the paddles!! -_-''
Nissan Hachi...
Hachi Roku is literally translated to 8-6(Eight Six), it's got nothing to do with it being a GT-S. If I remember right Japland never even had a "GT-S" designation, it was the Apex that hit across the pond.in.the.dark is 100% correct. Lopping the turbos off of a car with a low compression ratio that was built for boost would be...foolish at best.
Originally Posted by WTX350Z
Or (history lesson for some) the Grand National vs Vette of its day? (no tune needed) he is comparing stock to stock, you are comparing "tune" to stock.
Notice neither the Grand National or the LS1 Camaro are currently being built.
Notice neither the Grand National or the LS1 Camaro are currently being built.
. Best, because it was known, and widely known, as the corvette killer. Not exactly what you think of when you think Buick, eh?The LS1 camaro/firebird was one of the biggest mistakes GM ever made, IMO. They were full of fail. The reason the VQ's, and most import motors for that matter, don't respond well to "bolt-on" mods, is because most of their potential has already been wrung from them. Throw a set of headers on a big block chevy v8, instant 30whp. Do the same on an import and you're lucky to find 10-12whp, accompanied by an annoying rasp.
Blah, I'm done typing...it's bed time.
[/rant]