New cars?

[digitalwanderer]

Argh, I couldn't find any good reviews of our particular Z. (2004 350Z Performance) But they generally seemed approving of it and it was called "the muscle car of 6-bangers" or something of the sort at more than a few places.

It's a good description, I like it. I snuck out for another quick run, I'm loving its headlights!

TOO FUN!!!!

 

[The549]

Yeah, well if you searched for a "Z350", you won't find much. But the 350Z got good reviews and while it's a tad heavy for my tastes, I'm sure rides great!

 

[digitalwanderer]

I should have known the best way to find out info about my car:

http://www.my350z.com

Yup, I joined another forum....

I found a ton of stuff out, almost all I like. Right now I'm just hunting about for floormats when I should ought to be sleeping... :?

I still can't believe my wife actually did it, I really can't. This is too cool. 8)

 

[Moloch]

I should have known the best way to find out info about my car:

http://www.my350z.com

Yup, I joined another forum....

I found a ton of stuff out, almost all I like. Right now I'm just hunting about for floormats when I should ought to be sleeping... :?

I still can't believe my wife actually did it, I really can't. This is too cool. 8)

How fast you get it up to?

 

[digitalwanderer]

How fast you get it up to?

About 95, but I was doing 85 in third gear before I got off the entrance ramp.

My wife told me she did 100 already stretching it out a bit on the highway, but we're only gonna put baby miles on it now for a few hundred miles. (Or at least try like hell to hold back a bit to break her in. :? )

I think she'll do about a middling 13 1/4 mile....I haven't been in a car like that since my friend's old souped-up '66 Tempest back in the late 80s.

 

[Sonic]

350Z is too slow for my tastes. It looks good but that engine needs dire improvement before it can take serious power adders. I'd take a Porsche (what the 350 aspires to be) any day over it. The G35 on the otherhand is a very sleek car with rear seats. You ge tthe 350 performance but in a much more uptown kinda way. Also, the Skyline GTR (G35) that will make its way over will definitely be worth the look.

To anyone that doesn't udnerstand the need for a bigger engine, it is not just about the engine. It's about so much more. Cars for some people are a method of transportation from point A to point B. Computers for some people are just a method for running word processing and standad office applications. Cars to some of us are machines of beauty and joy that can go fast in a straight line and around corners. Computers to some people are meant for fast 3d gaming and the very best performance and image quality. I don't see how cars are that different for enthusiasts. So I say to all those who do not understand, it is the same way people who do not understand the need or wanting of a fast gaming rig.


With all that said and done with....

I love cars. Cars in general are fantastic machines all the way from a Toyota Prius to the new Corvette Z06 (based upon the C6). The new Vette will probably still get around 25 - 27 MPG on the highway and that would be rather nice. High performing cars are definitely not for everyone, but I would rather have a Gallardo over an SL500 anyday. It's not the status, it's more the performance. Penis size may be the talk about some of those with cars like that, but that's probably because those discussing them have problems of their own in the penile area.

I'd take a Lotus Elise over a Mini any day. The handling is great and it weighs next to nothing. Top that with RWD compared ot FWD for the Mini and it is no contest.

Cars on my no no list as of now are:

RX8 - crap for gas mileage, crap for accelaration, crap for outside looks. One positive is it is beautiful on the inside

350Z - nice all around car, but I do not like the styling compared to its more civilized brother the G35

S2000 - sort of like a peppy Miata but without the Mazda

Evo VIII - this car makes the list because Mitsubishi dealerships are willing to go out of their way to void the warranty on the cars for mundane things

Cars on my yes list are great but I will not speak of the Aston Martins, the Lambos or Ferraries, Porsche:

G35 - a beautiful car with grace, style, lovely interior, and smooth grunt

Legacy GT - the car looks very nice to me, it has the WRS STi engine a little detuned, a couple mods will wake the car up

Corvette C6 - very solid performer with great daily driver functionality, better gas mileage than all other cars on my yes list so far....of course that depends on how you drive....on the highway 28 MPG is not bad

BMW M5 - very well engineered, the driver's car that is great, only downside is that some of its competition in the same price range absolutely destroys it


There is a difference from track use and regular daily driving use. For a regular daily driver a nice Toyota does the trick. I don't need anything fancy but would consider a Lexus or Cadillac. One thing that I am hoping for is that Toyota will include a hybrid option on all its cars as it would make for very nice options.

 

[Sonic]

Excess of 150 MPH is not uncommon, but that is primarily on roads that nobody else is on.......i.e. a closed course.

 

[Moloch]

Snipped.

You're crazy.
Show me(and dig) a faster car for the money.
The engine is most def a strong point with the 350Z- its got 287HP, and 274 lb. feet of torque!
Compared to its rivels, its awsome.
What porsche goes for 30 grand~ and has similar specs?
The boxster top model only has 280HP, and costs 50 grand.
The base model(non s) has 240Hp and costs 43 grand.
I think the price to performance most def. goes to the 350Z.
Perhaps theirs some porsche that goes for 30 grand that will wipe the floor with the 350 I don't know about

 

[PC-Engine]

I agree the Z price performance is way better than anything Porsche can muster. Porsches are overrated anyway. Rear engine cars suck in the handling department. The only thing that the Z copied from Porsche was the overall shape. In my previous post I said the 350Z only looks like a Porsche with lines. All Nissan needs to do now is release a 350Z Turbo for $40K 8)

 

[Moloch]

I agree the Z price performance is way better than anything Porsche can muster. Porsches are overrated anyway. Rear engine cars suck in the handling department. The only thing that the Z copied from Porsche was the overall shape. In my previous post I said the 350Z only looks like a Porsche with lines. All Nissan needs to do now is release a 350Z Turbo for $40K 8)

Rear engine cars do not SUCK in teh handling department, they're just harder to drive.
That 50:50 weight distro mazda and every other car maker(with F-R configs) is bullshit.
What does 50:50 become when apply the brakes

The race proven perfect distro for road-racing is around 42/58.

 

[Sonic]

Oh yeah, rear engine cars suck for handling. That is a highly laughable statement if I've ever heard one, seems like you need to go out and actually drive cars that have engines in the rear. I'm not going to insult you with that statement but what you said is a riot. It's wrong on so many levels.

How is a 350Z good in terms of price/performance? Compared to a Porsche, yes, but then again you pay a premium for such a car. What does the Z have compared to other cars in its price range that it excels in? Handling is not one of them, neither is straight line performance. 287/300 HP (300 for this year's anniversary and track model) is nothing to sneeze at but it really is not the best buy in its price class. I can buy an Evo or a WRX STi and run circles around a 350Z, and the crazy thing is that I'm doing that in a 4 door grocery getter. The car doesn't have any real advantages in its class over looks, which are subjective. Hell, a new Mazda for the same price coming in a few months will outhandle and perform a 350Z, and that's not even the RX8.

 

[Moloch]

Oh yeah, rear engine cars suck for handling. That is a highly laughable statement if I've ever heard one, seems like you need to go out and actually drive cars that have engines in the rear. I'm not going to insult you with that statement but what you said is a riot. It's wrong on so many levels.

How is a 350Z good in terms of price/performance? Compared to a Porsche, yes, but then again you pay a premium for such a car. What does the Z have compared to other cars in its price range that it excels in? Handling is not one of them, neither is straight line performance. 287/300 HP (300 for this year's anniversary and track model) is nothing to sneeze at but it really is not the best buy in its price class. I can buy an Evo or a WRX STi and run circles around a 350Z, and the crazy thing is that I'm doing that in a 4 door grocery getter. The car doesn't have any real advantages in its class over looks, which are subjective. Hell, a new Mazda for the same price coming in a few months will outhandle and perform a 350Z, and that's not even the RX8.

An rx8 get stompted by everything- even an rsx- watch best motering videos.
Btw, mazda really screwed up with the rx8, I knew the us rx8s are still overated in terms of power, but I didn't think the japanese would be that bad since they have less strict emissions.
What's the point of buying a car simply because of the name?
It's the same thing with people bashing the z06 2007 vette.
The AWD cars don't have the appeal of a RWD car, and dont have as good as engine- have you seen a recent(not sure which) episode of top gear where they test the evo?
Clarkson has a top gear accleration test from like 30mph or something, and some cheap ass car beats it- turbo lag= lose.
Also subaru and mitsi suck for warranties- if you race one and they find out, your warrenty is revoked.

 

[Sonic]

Why are you chiming in with the RX8? Did I say it was a good car? It has a nice interior, I like it a lot, but it is ugly. I'm not a fan of high revving engines that make 238 or so HP by the time it reaches a 9,000 RPG redline, that is ridiculous. I would definitely buy a 350 over that any day, but I still wouldn't buy a 350.

You may think AWD don't have the appeal but I'm guessing that some of those AWD cars out there have high appeal. Do you think the new Skyline GTR will have no appeal once it comes to the states? Porsches have no appeal? I will agree that a boxy four door sedan has no appeal even with AWD, but that doesn't change the fact that they still perform better than a 350Z. I watch all different types of races, except for NASCAR which get boring after 10 laps, and love the Best Motoring series. They are great drivers. It also helps to have first hand experience with all the cars mentioned. Turbo lag might be bad, but did you once think the Evo has crap for gearing the higher the speeds go? Hell, if you really want to talk turbo lag then let's see a 350 against a Supra. Who do you think would win that one? I'll even give the 350 a twin turbo kit or a supercharger, all the Supra needs to have is BPU++. That would sure be fun to watch, since the lag from the turbos on the Supra is too much I'm sure the 350 would smoke it from a roll....but I still doubt it because of gearing.

One last thing before I go to bed. Many cars today leave a lot to be desired.

An 04 Mustang Cobra would walk a 350. Same price range for ya.

 

[PC-Engine]

Oh yeah, rear engine cars suck for handling. That is a highly laughable statement if I've ever heard one, seems like you need to go out and actually drive cars that have engines in the rear. I'm not going to insult you with that statement but what you said is a riot. It's wrong on so many levels.

Then why doesn't Ferrari make rear engined cars?

As a matter of fact does anyone make rear engined sportscars nowadays other than Porsche? You do know why Porsche makes rear engined sportscars right? It's not because it improves handling. Ever heard of low polar moment of inertia?

An 04 Mustang Cobra would walk a 350. Same price range for ya.

Yeah and then you'd have to take it to the shop afterwards.

AWD cars have higher drive loss too so you need more hp to overcome this. While we are at it why not compare these cars to a Dodge Neon SRT? LMAO...it's pointless. Also a twin turbo Supra compared to a 350Z is kinda pointless. Why not compare the NA Supra to the 350Z? Doesn't look to good does it?

 

[Moloch]

Oh yeah, rear engine cars suck for handling. That is a highly laughable statement if I've ever heard one, seems like you need to go out and actually drive cars that have engines in the rear. I'm not going to insult you with that statement but what you said is a riot. It's wrong on so many levels.

Then why doesn't Ferrari make rear engined cars?

As a matter of fact does anyone make rear engined sportscars nowadays other than Porsche? You do know why Porsche makes rear engined sportscars right? It's not because it improves handling. Ever heard of low polar moment of inertia?

An 04 Mustang Cobra would walk a 350. Same price range for ya.

Yeah and then you'd have to take it to the shop afterwards.

AWD cars have higher drive loss too so you need more hp to overcome this. While we are at it why not compare these cars to a Dodge Neon SRT? LMAO...it's pointless. Also a twin turbo Supra compared to a 350Z is kinda pointless. Why not compare the NA Supra to the 350Z? Doesn't look to good does it?

RR is better than FR, but MR is the best.
But you think RR sucks for handling(compared to FR.. haha) so there's no point in arguing, since you know better t han everyone else
And yes I have btw.
Here's a great thread on drivelines
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/showthread.php?t=811032

 

[PC-Engine]

Actually I didn't say anything about FR being better than RR.

All I said was that rear engined cars (engine behind rear axle) suck in the handling department relatively speaking.

Ironically that link you posted contained this:

Back in the seventies and eighties Porsche spend millions advertising the advantages of the front engine/rear transaxle high polar moment of inertia layout as the BEST architecture for a street sports car. They were right, but their customers kept demanding quirky 911s, so the Porsche family finally fired Peter Schutz and dumped the 924 and 928.

 

[Moloch]

Actually I didn't say anything about FR being better than RR.

All I said was that rear engined cars (engine behind rear axle) suck in the handling department relatively speaking.

Ironically that link you posted contained this:

Back in the seventies and eighties Porsche spend millions advertising the advantages of the front engine/rear transaxle high polar moment of inertia layout as the BEST architecture for a street sports car. They were right, but their customers kept demanding quirky 911s, so the Porsche family finally fired Peter Schutz and dumped the 924 and 928.

Ya pretty funny actually.
But how many mid engine cars(discountint MR2, since the currrent version is a joke) are affordable?
RR>FR period, I dont care what porsche in the 70s and 80s thought either.

 

[PC-Engine]

The current MR2 Spyder is only a joke when you compare them to more expensive cars.

And even then it's because the little 1.8 liter only puts out 140hp.

Drop in a 180 hp 2ZZ like many people have and then say it's a joke.

Let's not even talk about the Lotus Exige with that same 2ZZ and MR layout.

The Elise isn't all that expensive btw. It's really only more expensive than the MR2 Spyder is because it's hand built and has the Lotus name not because a MR layout sportscar is expensive to make. Urban legend my friend.

A $25K MR2 Spyder with a 2ZZ will rip a $40K Porsche Boxter a new one and the Boxter is even a MR.

 

[Moloch]

The current MR2 Spyder is only a joke when you compare them to more expensive cars.

And even then it's because the little 1.8 liter only puts out 140hp.

Drop in a 180 hp 2ZZ like many people have and then say it's a joke.

Let's not even talk about the Lotus Exige with that same 2ZZ and MR layout.

The Elise isn't all that expensive btw. It's really only more expensive than the MR2 Spyder is because it's hand built and has the Lotus name not because a MR layout sportscar is expensive to make. Urban legend my friend.

A $25K MR2 Spyder with a 2ZZ will rip a $40K Porsche Boxter a new one and the Boxter is even a MR.

Why so you have to drop an engine into a car to make it decent?
That means the car sucks because you need to goto though the process of swaping an engine etc.

 

[PC-Engine]

The current MR2 Spyder is only a joke when you compare them to more expensive cars.

And even then it's because the little 1.8 liter only puts out 140hp.

Drop in a 180 hp 2ZZ like many people have and then say it's a joke.

Let's not even talk about the Lotus Exige with that same 2ZZ and MR layout.

The Elise isn't all that expensive btw. It's really only more expensive than the MR2 Spyder is because it's hand built and has the Lotus name not because a MR layout sportscar is expensive to make. Urban legend my friend.

A $25K MR2 Spyder with a 2ZZ will rip a $40K Porsche Boxter a new one and the Boxter is even a MR.

Why so you have to drop an engine into a car to make it decent?
That means the car sucks because you need to goto though the process of swaping an engine etc.

It means the chassis already kicks major @ss. In other words the MR layout is doesn't cost a lot like many think. It's just an urban legend.

Why did Toyota not drop the 2ZZ in the MR2 Spyder when they dropped it into the Matrix and Corolla?