Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Nissan 350Z

2456739

Comments

  • flyingfish176flyingfish176 Member Posts: 22
    Well said, my friend.

    1) You're right, but the image of the Z wasn't like the image of the Civic/Corolla/Justy. I think people didn't look at "Japanese cars" holistically, but looked at each individual car's image, just like the domestics. Viper was a Dodge, and Dodge had a rep for poor quality... good image didn't seem to be there to help it.

    2) We're talking about image, here. The NSX has been an extraordinary success with image, if nothing else. Can you honestly say you've driven by an NSX and not said "wow" ?

    3) So you're saying the image of the 90's trio didn't fit with the image of previous gens? Yep, that's accurate. But there's no reason a car's image can't change... just look at the Mercury Cougar.

    4) It's a marketing decision... put it in a price class of it's own to build some image. They shouldn't have to justify it... nobody else has has to. For example: Cadillac sells a rebadged Tahoe for $15,000 more, and I'll bet that price is ... a little inflated to create good image, compared to the actual value of the vehicle. Same with many other Caddies, they don't have to justify it, though.

    So the Z, RX and Supra all had images previously, and all failed because they tried to change their image from budget-racer to high-dollar sports-car. That tells me two things: we North American car buyers are both stubborn and prejudiced. Stubborn because we can't accept these formerly inexpensive cars as "higher image", prejudiced because the judgement is based on image instead of actual technology and value.
  • revdrluvrevdrluv Member Posts: 417
    Right on flying fish. The three japanese super coupes (four if you want to count the 3000gt) failed because the grew too expensive for their fan base to afford them. Thats it really. They were great cars but maybe a little too great. A little too ambitious. That stubborness you speak of is not limited to us North American consumers, these cars met a similar fate in the UK and Europe.

    The NSX is respected but not that many are bought. Honda I think was a little too ambitious with that price tag. The next one might have a v8 and be priced far less, now that would be great brand positioning. Price it to compete with the corvette Z06 and then things will get fun.
  • ezshift5ezshift5 Member Posts: 858
    ........has a familiar-themed article about the new Nissan 350Z.......www.detnews.com.........doesn't address the weight tho'
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Member Posts: 16,373
    the 4 banger BMW thing. The reason BMW replaced the car with an I-6 is because the American market didn't take to the 318 well. The majority of 318 buyers wanted the car with an automotic and bought the car just so they could say they have a Bimmer (I hate that word). If these people would drive 318s with a 5 speed, they'd still import them here.

    Early 90's Japanese cars failed because they got too damn expensive. A Turbo Z in '90 was $30 Grand, So was a 3000GT VR4. By the time '95 hit, these cars stickered somewhere in the neighborhood of $50 Grand and they didn't make that much money for the car companies. These cars were built on platforms of their own and didn't share engives with other cars in their stable. Huge overhead.

    2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2022 Wrangler Sahara 4Xe, 2023 Toyota Tacoma SR 4WD

  • flyingfish176flyingfish176 Member Posts: 22
    ooh, those hideous 318ti's eh? I always thought they looked like Hyundai Accents with BMW badges!

    The Japanese four horsemen (Z, VR-4, Supra, RX-7) I still don't think were too expensive, they were a good value for what you got. But everybody sees them as too expensive because their predecessors were cheapies. The problem would have been averted had they changed the names of the cars to suit the new image they set.
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Member Posts: 16,373
    I agree, the 318ti's were not my favorite, but the 318is was cool if you got it with the 5 speed.

    2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2022 Wrangler Sahara 4Xe, 2023 Toyota Tacoma SR 4WD

  • msaralnomsaralno Member Posts: 9
    I'm curious if anybody has any comments on the new 350z with and without a convertible top.

    I presently have a convertible Saab. The convertible is fun, but I am not particularly attached to it.

    With the new 350z, I am not anxious to wait for the convertible and nor am I excited to pay what I suspect will be at least about $5000 more.

    Anyone have any comments on the advisability of one versus the other?
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    I have seen the photos of the actual production prototype Z (vs. previous concept car photos) and think it looks great. I will keep an open mind, but I'm not sure how it will look as a convertible. Many cars designed initially as hardtops lose a significant amount of their aethetics in convertable form. Not to mention their handling performance. From what my engineering literate friends tell me, a hardtop coupe designed for optimal handling performance would have a different chassis and body structure than an optimally designed convertable/roadster. When you try to go both ways on the same basic chassis structure, one or the other version will be compromised. I would be tempted to go with the hardtop Z, since previous versions of the Z convertible suggest this is not Nissan's strong suit.
  • hambone32hambone32 Member Posts: 68
    I am looking forward to the new Z. At this time, it looks very promising. I hope Nissan does it right. Their former model was the best car I ever owned. Extremely well built. Very tight, powerful, and reliable. I really miss that car and hope the new one is a worthy replacement for one of the nicest cars to ever come out of Japan.
  • msaralnomsaralno Member Posts: 9
    Habitat1:

    You raise some very good points. Thanks for the feedback.
  • hambone32hambone32 Member Posts: 68
    I don't know about these Japanese cars failing because they were too cheap. I just hope the new Z isn't too expensive when you start puting options on it. I think that Nissan desperately needs two coupes, the Z and a lower-end model, to compete with Honda and Toyota
  • ambullambull Member Posts: 255
    I found the following article about Nissan, which includes info about the Z. See "Nissan Revival Plan showing big results" under Recent Stories at http://www.autoweek.com
  • flyingfish176flyingfish176 Member Posts: 22
    You know, I think I'd prefer having a convertible. I don't really like the roofline of the new Z very much, and although I realize it's an essential part of the design (it maintains a link to the Z's long history), I think it could have been styled more elegantly. Just my opinion.

    Hambone, the Z does not have to compete with Honda and Toyota, rather Honda and Toyota need to compete with it. The 350Z fills the niche (which by the Z's inception will be empty) formerly occupied by the Honda Prelude. Except the Z has a two crucial differences: 1) it has a V6, and 2) it actually has exciting style (that's something Honda and Toyota will never match, by the looks of it). But you are right that there needs to be another coupe. My vote goes to the beautiful 200SX (Silvia) - get it over here, Nissan!
  • ambullambull Member Posts: 255
    I don't know how reliable it is, but here is a link to a new coupe Nissan is developing. It kinda looks like an ugly Prelude:

    http://thehollywoodextra.com/nissan/nissan.html
  • charliemikecharliemike Member Posts: 87
    Actually, that IS an ugly Prelude.

    That website is wrong =)
  • sphinx99sphinx99 Member Posts: 776
    That looks a lot like an Accord Coupe that got put in the dryer and shrunk a bit.
  • hambone32hambone32 Member Posts: 68
    flyingfish, Nissan could compete in the coupe market with Honda and Toyota, but they don't. I was in the market for a coupe, no four-dour, no way. Honda has the Civic, Accord, and S2000, basically something for everyone. Toyota has the Celica and Solara (I bought the Solara). Nissan has nothing. They don't build the Z yet, so you can't buy one. The thing is a year away. My last two cars were Nissans and I had to go to another company for a coupe. That sucks. What do you think the new Z will going to cost? I think they will be around $30,000, which will compete with S2000, the only sports car in the aforementioned bunch.
  • bobbyknightbobbyknight Member Posts: 121
    I hate to say this, but the new 350 is oh so ugly. It looks like an egg gone bad. How could they do this? The 300ZX is still one of the cleanest designs around and it was introduced 12 years ago. Why did Nissan have to screw this one up?
  • natureboy1natureboy1 Member Posts: 55
    I like the last 300ZX better... As least in the looks department...
  • sphinx99sphinx99 Member Posts: 776
    I do as well. The new 350Z is, like the RSX, a bit too swooping and egg-like for me. I'm still waiting for something in an SC400 body to make a comeback, I don't care who makes it.
  • flyingfish176flyingfish176 Member Posts: 22
    hambone: Hmm. I guess you have me there. I see, then, what Nissan needs to do is sell the 200SX here. If they added a car with the GT-R body and a less sophisticated engine and interior and sold it for $30,000, alongside a $22,000 200SX, Nissan could compete for those markets, but you're right, they don't. Funny.

    bobbyknight: the 240SX's designed in 1988 are also still pretty fresh-looking. Both the coupes and the hatchbacks could probably still be sold today, with some minor changes to the headlights.
  • dohc32vdohc32v Member Posts: 60
    >>>>If they added a car with the GT-R body and a less sophisticated engine and interior and sold it for $30,000<<<<

    Who is going to buy one? You are into the Market level of a Cobra Mustang or an SS F body, which would suck the doors off something like that.
  • alaskans13alaskans13 Member Posts: 22
    Yes Nissan could compete in the coupe market. However, it wouldn't be with a detuned GTR for $30,000. That's what the 350z is suposed to sell for, so why bring a $30,000 GTR to compete with themselves? The GTR would make a good sports model above the Z. There are rumors that Nissan may bring the full blown GTR after they introduce the Skyline(Infiniti G45). Don't know how well it would sell though for the same reasons that the NSX doesn't sell in large numbers, and the older Japanese sports cars failed.

    Oh, but if they did bring a GTR with the RB26DETT, it would be the one blowing the doors off Cobra's and SS's.

    It would be awsome if they brought over the Silvia too(200SX, JDM version of 240sx). We did have the 240sx in 1989 through 1997. Both the S13/RPS13(fastback) and S14 chassis(I have a S13 as my name says). However, they are on the S15 chassis in Japan right now, and it's one of the best looking sport compact cars in the world(and it sends power to the correct wheels, the rear). It would sell like crazy if they brought it over and priced/marketed it between the SER Spec V and 350z. That would put it right in the range of the RSX, GTS, WRX, etc. It would out perform all except possibly the WRX, which would make for a very close race. They should move on to the an S16 chassis within a few years, and maybe if we're lucky it will make it to the US. Actually now that I think about it, there is a chance that it could. Infiniti has said that all of there future models will be RWD. If they want a smaller car, they currently have no chassis to base it off of in the USA. So, if infiniti decides they want a smaller car(like the old G20 or J30) they will pretty much have to bring over the Silvia.

    Lastly, I wouldn't exactly call the Honda Prelude a niche car. It's a FWD sport compact car. The Integra/RSX is virtually the same thing, atleast performance wise. There's also the Celica, Sentra, and many many other crappy FWD SCC's(sorry, I'm a RWD and AWD fan, so I don't really think they are crappy, just their driveline). The Z is completly different, it's RWD, has better performance, image, it's a 2 seater. Basically the Z is a sports car, the Prelude is a sport compact car.

    The Z is kinda a niche car for now. Performance wise, it does have a lot of competitors in the sports car market(S2000, soon to be RX8, M3, M Coupe/Roadster, Boxster, 911, Corvette, etc, etc, I'm not saying it will outperform all of these, just that it will be in their performance range). However the only real competitor within it's price range is the S2000 which as we all know is a roadster, so kinda different market(although I'm sure many will cross shop). I think the RX8 will be the closest competitor when it comes out.

    Sorry for the long post, I just haven't replied lately and I'm a big Nissan fan.
  • flyingfish176flyingfish176 Member Posts: 22
    I think I meant $19,000 Silvia and $23,000 Skyline. That's what you get for not converting Canadian dollars first. Who would buy one? Someone looking to cross-shop something with an Accord coupe or a Camry Solara, Pontiac Grand Prix or Chrysler Sebring Coupe; and who finds a suitable Nissan in the price range with luxury options. Sorry for the confusion.

    And the Prelude competing with the Integra? No, I don't think so. Why would Honda be so stupid? The Prelude is not in a niche with the Integra, imo.
  • playathug21playathug21 Member Posts: 20
    People looking into Japanese sports cars/coupes aren't looking into American Muscle Cars for a certain reason we like to call driving a DRIVERS car. The only thing Mustangs/FBodies are good for is driving straight. I'll give you the Mustang Cobra, that handles pretty well but not comparable to many Japanese cars. Just because YOU would buy an American muscle car, doesn't mean people will. They're in different niches if you ask me.
  • flyingfish176flyingfish176 Member Posts: 22
    At that price range, you're also in a category with the 325Ci, IS300, and base-level CL. Which one looks better now?

    Gee for that price, which would you buy? A 325Ci or a Camaro SS? The two may be in the same price range, but are in entirely separate classes.
  • alaskans13alaskans13 Member Posts: 22
    I'd say the Integra and Prelude couldn't be more alike. Both FF(front engine, front drive) coupes, similar size, performance, options, etc, etc. They pretty much both define the FF compact market. Also, I don't think the Prelude has been selling very well, which could be due to competition within Honda(especially now that the RSX is out). I don't see any niche for the prelude, there's lots of competition in this class.

    Oh, and Nissan does have something in the same market as the Accord, Grand Am, etc. The 240HP Altima.

    IMO, they do need to bring over a good car for the upper end of the sport compact market. The SE-R is a nice car, but it's mostly suited to competing with the ZX3's, SI's, etc. Basically it's at the lower end of the SCC market. The Silvia would be the perfect car to compete in the upper end(WRX, RSX, Prelude, GTS, etc). Then the Z can be marketed towards the true sports car market(S2000, etc) and thus, no internal competition.
  • flyingfish176flyingfish176 Member Posts: 22
    Prelude imo was a class slightly above the Integra. Since Honda doesn't make anything but front-engine, front-drivers (S2000 being the only exception... it is atypical Honda), it would be hard to separate the classes that way. Prelude had three things that Integra didn't: weight, torque, and traction control. Prelude was Honda's best imitation of a heavy cruiser, while the Integra was a light, nimble sporty car. The Integra's bread-and-butter engine had 140hp, the Prelude had 200hp and gobs more torque from a 25% larger engine. If you ask me, 25% more displacement, 40 more hp, 40 more lb-ft, and 500lbs more puts it into a separate class. Do you disagree?

    Now, comparing the Prelude to the RSX isn't really fair, since the Prelude was already on the way out when RSX cannibalized its market. That really is the reason Prelude's being cancelled: the Integra became too similar and internal competition would be too great. Come to think of it, that's probably also the reason the 3rd-gen Integra lasted 8 years.

    The Altima can compete with the Grand Am and Accord sedans, but if you're looking for a coupe, Nissan's lost your business.

    Nissan, if you're listening:
    Sentra, 200SX. One coupe, one sedan, same engines (SR20DE).
    Altima, 300SX. One coupe, one sedan. Give the 300SX the VQ30DD.
    Maxima, 350ZX. One coupe, one sedan, one convertible.
    There's something for everybody here (bring in the Wingroad or Avenir to compete with Protege5, Matrix/Vibe, IS300 Sportcross, Focus ZX5). Not only that, but the numbering would make sense again!
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    ...but I think the Prelude's survival until 2002 is a tribute to Honda. Anybody else putting out an equivalent car would have had to practically give it away IMHO.

    I am a fan of Honda, having just bought an S2000. I also owned two previous Acuras - an 1987 Integra and 1995 Legend GS 6-speed. To me, the Prelude was a total mystery. Perhaps heavier and with more horsepower than the Integra, but behind it in true performance. And well behind newer offerings by Audi, BMW and others relative to a "luxury" sport coupe. I never could figure out who the Honda's target buyer was. A long former girlfriend of mine bought two over the years, but she was a study in contradictions herself (i.e. nuts).

    That the Prelude survived as long as it did is a tribute to the fact that Honda has an excellent reputation and that some people will buy almost anything with their marque on it. But I think the Prelude was barely competitive as a "near luxury sport coupe" at least 5-7 years before it got its plug pulled. Dont' get me wrong - it was a very solid car but just with a combination of characteristics that resulted in a very narrow market appeal.

    Just my 2 cents.

    P.S. Another "just my opinion" comment. There may be some people that absolutely prefer a two door coupe, but for me, I would only give up the extra versitility of a sedan if I was getting something in exchange for going the coupe route: namely performance or exceptional aesthetics. I made that choice when I got the S2000 as a third car. But when I got my 1995 Nissan Maxima SE, I tested the Accord Sedan and Coupe and found that neither performed as well. Notwithstanding some notable successes (CLK, 330ci), the luxury "sport coupe" is a marketing challange today, partly because of the quality of performance sedans from BMW, Audi and others. I was either going with a replacement sedan (530i sport) or a true sports car as a third car (S2000), but couldn't rationalize a coupe (M3) as our family's second car.
  • sphinx99sphinx99 Member Posts: 776
    As one of the "nuts" who bought three Preludes over the years (each time over Integras and other compacts) the appeal of the Prelude was the niche in terms of driving feel that I feel it did occupy and partly define. One review I read described it as japanese engineering, german solidity. The Prelude had a lot of moves in its arsenal that I only see in cars costing twice as much, including road feedback, steering precision and (in the Type SH) overall handling, balance and traction at the limits. It's also one of the very few cars I could take to 10/10ths comfortably while the other "sporty compacts" started to feel skittish. Drive one back to back with an Integra at 120mph and you'll see what I mean... must be all that extra weight.

    I think the problem with the Prelude was, as you said, the fact that it wasn't clear who was being targetted. It definitely wasn't for the pocket rocket crowd that couldn't afford it and would get better performance and more tossability out of a lighter car anyway. It wasn't the "sports car" crowd that wanted more performance and could either afford much more, or would go used to get it. I think the target market was people like me from a year or two ago: people who wanted a serious driver-oriented car (in the same vein as a 911 or a M3) but just didn't have deep pockets. A friend of mine who owned an SH and now owns an '99 M3 (I think '99) told me the Prelude was 70% of his M3 at 50% of the cost. If you wanted a driver-oriented, low-slung, uncommon true coupe (true = has a trunk) then the Prelude was virtually the only game in town without adding $15-25k to the price tag. Unfortunately, we're not a big market; tossability definitely comes at the expense of solidity unless you're ready for some big car payments, and most people in my age and income level will choose tossability over solidity while auto journalists will choose solidity. That's why the Prelude won the awards, while the Integras got sold out.

    The other thing to remember is that the Prelude, built in Japan, was subject to some hefty import taxes, unlike (as of 2001) pretty much all of its competitors. Like many other imports, U.S.-spec'd Preludes were neutered versions of their JDM cousins. The Prelude Type S sold in Japan came with heated leather seats, a 220hp engine with more torque, standard ATTS AND four wheel steering, navigation, and the works. It was a compact performance-oriented luxury cruiser that would have competed directly with a 325Ci or a TT... but that car never made it to our shores.

    I would have loved to see that car with a 2.3L I4 and a low-boost factory supercharger, and more meaty tires at all four corners, it would have been the Honda version of the CLK. I would have paid low $30s for it, even with the Honda logo on the grill...
  • sphinx99sphinx99 Member Posts: 776
    But getting back to the 350Z, the reason the Prelude gets brought up here is its similarty to the previous Z (and the Supra) both of which earned reputations as heavy cruisers, obviously positioned considerably higher up the ladder than Honda's entry. It looks like this market all but evaporated, the only survivors being luxury european coupes like the CLK that themselves are not exactly high-volume vehicles. When the 350Z returns, should it be a CLK, or should it be a S2000?
  • flyingfish176flyingfish176 Member Posts: 22
    There is no way Honda would ever produce a car with forced induction. That's the reason they didn't ever compete with the Z, Supra, RX-7.

    I live on a university campus, and can't relp but notice what a huge sales success the Prelude has been. There are as many Preludes as there are Integras, and this on a campus where 1 in 4 cars is a Honda/Acura. That makes for an awful lot of Preludes. I think that the 350Z should have a model available in the general price range of the Prelude ($28,000 - $33,000) to appeal to all these current Prelude owners, with a turbo roadster version not going higher than the S2000 ($48,000).

    If the price gets too high (over $50,000), then sales will be slow. Take the Audi TT for instance: the $50,000-59,000 price range puts it out of reach for many, and they remain a rare sight on these roads. The Z is similar in conception to the TT, but selling the car in the wrong price range will have a negative effect on sales.

    300ZX - 3.0L, 240hp, $28,500
    350ZX - 3.5L, 295hp, $35,000
    350ZXT - 3.5L turbo, 330hp, $41,000

    (The engines are hypothetical, the prices are in Canadian $ 'cuz I'm too lazy to convert right now)
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    ..is a nice dream, but it isn't very realistic. A 295hp 350Z for $35,000 Canadian (coverts to under $23,000 US today) is just a little greedy. If I'm not mistaken, that's $2k Canadian less than a Maxima SE 6-speed.

    I think the $32k to $36k USD price range for a 350Z will allow Nissan to produce a high quality car that competes with some costing $10k+ more from Europe. A sub-$30k 350Z is likely to require compromises that would kill the car for someone like me. And I think I represent at least one of the target demographics Nissan has in mind. I just bought an S2000 as a third car and, although I could afford a BMW M roadster, SLK320 or Boxter S, felt that the S2000 was very competitive in performace and much easier to justify on the pocketbook.


    If you want something "fun" for $25k, get an Acura RSX-S. I'm a little to old for going in that direction and, had it not been for the great all-around performance attributes of the S2000, I would probably be driving an M3 Coupe this spring.

    Also, the idea that you can stick 3 engines in a car and end up with a $10k price differential is, IMHO, the wrong approach. The S2000 has a world class chassis. The difference in production cost between the different engines mentioned above is probably less than $500. I read where the new 3.5L replacing the 3.0L in the Maxima/I35 is actually within $100 of the production cost of the former. A $10k price differential between different "versions" of the Z would require a lot more compromises than a few cc's of displacement. There is nothing wrong with the new Z not being affordable to everyone.
  • dohc32vdohc32v Member Posts: 60
    >>>>I think the $32k to $36k USD price range for a 350Z will allow Nissan to produce a high quality car that competes with some costing $10k+ more from Europe. <<<<<

    If a level headed buyer, who doesn't have his snoot up about driving a foreign car, looks at a Cobra Mustang, he would be a fool to buy a "Z". He could pocket anywhere from $2 to $6K by your numbers and still get a better car. If he wants a real rocket, all he has to do is put a blower on the Cobra and he will blow past anything out of Europe at three times the price.
  • wishnhigh1wishnhigh1 Member Posts: 363
    and I can build a dragster frame, put a hearse engine in it and blow the hell out of your mustang cobra for 10,000 less. Whats your point?

    The mustang is ugly. It has a big nose heavy front end. It understeers pretty bad. It is too long, too wide, and too heavy to be competitive. It handles like a whale(the cobra only slightly better than the GT). And it has a cheap and ugly interior. There is a reason why people are snooty about not driving a mustang.
  • alaskans13alaskans13 Member Posts: 22
  • alaskans13alaskans13 Member Posts: 22
    Oh, and I could take a Datsun 510. Swap in an SR20DET. Tweek it to about 350hp. Run circles around the Cobra, and all for under $10,000. Heck it could probably be done for under $5,000.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    ..I am completely unwilling to give a Ford Mustang or Chevy Camaro the time of day when it comes to my automotive preferences. For me, the aesthetic appeal of these cars is nonexistant.

    And the idea that 0-60 would be the ultimate measure of a car's performance is not where I am at. That would be like suggesting I should like the design of a tract house by a production builder better than Frank Lloyd Wright's Fallingwater because the tract house is bigger.

    So why is your dream car a Ferrari 360?? Maybe you actually "get it" and just can't admit it?
  • sphinx99sphinx99 Member Posts: 776
    I'm attracted to the Mustang on exhaust note alone. Having tuned into the exhaust notes of such storied cars as a Ferrari F355 Berlinetta, 911 Carrera, and a Honda S2000 with VTEC activated, the Mustang's growl (all V8 trims) still is the most intoxicating note I've heard. I'd probably add a few thousand dollars to the price of the car just for that sound, and it does go a long way towards making up for the body roll, visibility, interior quality, traction, sloppy steering, and other problems with the car. (Obviously it doesn't make up for all of it, or I'd have bought a GT, but it does help.)

    One other thing - the Mustang GT, Cobra and Cobra SVT convertibles are hands down define a niche occupied by no others, now that the Camaro is dead. There are pretty much no cars putting up those kinds of performance numbers at that price, with a droptop.

    So I definitely give the Mustang its due; just because it's not right for me doesn't mean I can't respect it for what it is, and what it does well.
  • flyingfish176flyingfish176 Member Posts: 22
    Ok, then. Back to my original idea:

    1) Sell a coupe with the Altima's V-6, and price it just above the Altima: $29,000 - $32,000. That 240hp would not only wipe out the RSX-S and the Accord V6 (for about the same price), but it would match the Grand Prix GTP and come close to the Mustang GT coupe (for about the same price). Call it 300SX or 350SX (depending on which engine goes in), but think of it as an "Altima coupe". The current Silvia body would work well. Z aside, I think Nissan needs to do this anyway.

    2) Sell the base 350ZX just above Maxima's range ($39,000) where it would compete directly in price with the BMW 325Ci and the Acura CL Type-S. If the price goes any higher than this, the Z will price itself out of the market for a second time. Even in this situation, comparing the Z to a 325Ci is a bit of a stretch, unless the Z is sold as an Infiniti model. Maybe that's what needs to happen. People often don't accept the idea of a $40k Mazda, and they might not accept a $40k Nissan.

    On the other hand, Nissan could charge a ludicrously high price tag for the Z. Charge $59,000 - $65,000, give it at least 375hp and pit it directly against the Corvette. That would give it a "supercar" image and an aura about it that could not possibly come from a $40,000 car. I'd almost give it a better chance at survival in the $60k range than in the $40k range.

    In summary: as good as I think the Z is, I don't give it very good chances of succeeding in the market today unless it can be a relatively inexpensive volume seller (e.g. Accord coupe, Camry Solara). If not, I can forsee it becoming a shrowded, quirky, expensive toy for midlife crises and the kids of millionaires (like Audi TT and Porsche Boxster... no offense intended), not the high-volume seller that Nissan needs it to be.

    Just my $0.02 ($0.0126 USD).
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    ...it forces me to exercise my brain cells converting Canadian to US dollars.

    The latest round of corporate layoffs notwithstanding, I still think there is a big market for a high performace 350Z in the $32k to $35k range ($50-55k Canadian). I don't see buyers cross shopping a BMW 3 coupe. I see it being an alternative to the "toys" you mentioned at a price point that's much easier to justify as a non-primary car. The market for two seaters is, by definition, pretty narrow. Trying to price it at a point where it works as a daily driver for the average 25 year old would, I'm afraid produce a product that was more comparable to a Miata than a Boxter. Cute, but not exactly cutting edge performance.

    Look, I'm probably just being influenced by my recent purchase of an S2000. If the 350Z was available at a comparable price, I would have shopped it. But not if it were designed with mass market compromises to compete at the low-middle end of the market.

    By the way, I think the the S2000 lists for $48k Canadian (a little less than the US list of $32,400). How are they selling in Canada? How do you see the 350Z positioned against it?
  • sphinx99sphinx99 Member Posts: 776
    I'm a little worried that the 350Z as currently spec'd would get flattened by the WRX/EVO/RX8/RSX/Cobra crowd. I think I agree with flyingfish that it may have a much better chance at survival at the $60k price point as a prestige vehicle (that Nissan currently lacks) that competes with the vette, M3, etc.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    ..but what is an EVO and is the RX8 even available? And what do you mean by currently spec'd? If the Z's performance can match its claims, it should be a competitor in the middle to upper middle end of the sport coupe / two seater market.

    As for your other comparisons, I'll repeat my previous statement. As a recent Honda S2000 buyer, I would have considered a 350Z if it offered comparable performance, aesthetics and value. None of the other cars you mentioned - the WRX, RSX, Cobra were within a mile of my list (although I understand the RSX is a great $20k something car for 20 somethings). The M3, Boxter S, CLK (not SLK) were. The S2000 was the only non-European car that competed for my attention. The Z could, potentially.
  • sphinx99sphinx99 Member Posts: 776
    EVO is a ~270hp four seat rally-oriented sport sedan that matches up against the WRX. Apparently this as well as the RX8 *are* headed to the U.S. These are all sub-6 second 0-60 cars sitting at the same price point as the 350Z, along with the S2000.

    So you're not cross-shopping these cars, fine. But many people will. One year ago when rumors of a $30k 260-280hp Z were flying about, the new Z would have sat at a price/performance point with virtually no competition other than maybe the S2000 and the Audi TT---but that was a year ago. When the 350Z arrives, it's going to stack up against much stiffer competition. The RSX-S is inexpensive but hits 60 in a shade over 6 seconds and has many of the S2000's slick goodies. Little needs to be said about the WRX, which also undercuts a 350Z's price by a wide margin. The EVO and RX-8 are likely to fall into that same bucket. Mercedes-Benz has successfully moved into the low-end coupe market with a surprisingly high value coupe, and a CL-S will offer similar power output, higher value, full luxury content and a manual transmission by the time the 350Z arrives. The Z3 will finally get a modern restyling, while the Cobra convertible will remain the best high performance convertible value, while the S2000 continues winning 10-Best awards. In other words, the $20k to $40k coupe/2-seater market that seemed a little dry a year ago, is a LOT more competitive. The Z is no longer competing against merely the high-strung S2000 and one or two other niche cars. It's going to have to knock the doors off everything else out there if it wants to achieve real mass-market success at $30k. If it isn't a gem, buyers will have no problem with roomer, equally torquey and smooth-revving Acura CLs or 325Cis, higher-strung S2000s, and the like. The 350Z isn't entering a "it's me or the highway" market, that was my point.
  • flyingfish176flyingfish176 Member Posts: 22
    The S2000 does reatil for $48,000. How common is it? Well, it's rare. Less common to see one on the road than a 3rd gen RX-7. Driving around town, you're likely to see 15 Boxsters before you see an S2000. IMO Nissan can't afford to have a product that sells in such low volumes.

    Oh, and when you're converting prices, you're better off to analogue the prices for competing cars first. If you simply convert the dollar amounts, you end up with "discrepancies" like the following: directly converted at 0.63 cents on the dollar, a Honda Prelude starts at $17,800 USD, an Acura RSX Type-S is under $20k USD and a Mazda Protege starts at only $9,800 USD.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    I have noticed that some cars have much lower Canadian prices than their US counterparts whereas others are fairly comparable. The Nissan Maxima for example, seems a real bargain in Canada. At a Canadian list of $36,900 + $966 freight for a fully loaded SE 6-speed, that works out to about $24,200 US at current exchange rates (vs. a US MSRP of about $30,000). Assuming the Canadian dealers discount by a similar percentage as US dealers, the price difference between a Canadian Maxima and US Maxima is about 20% less in Canada.

    When I looked at the conversion of a BMW 530i, the Canadian price was much closer to the US equivalent. Even Hondas seem to be priced in Canada more in line with their US counterparts. The S2000 list of $48k converts to about $1,700 less than the $32,440 US list (i.e. about 5.3% less in Canada).

    Note: I used 1.56:1 as the current conversion factor, although it was as high as 1.60 a few weeks ago. Educate me if I am missing something in these comparisons.

    P.S. I fully agree with you that Nissan can't afford to limit production of the 350Z to Honda S2000 volumes and have it be financially successful. On the other hand, as an S2000 owner, I confess to enjoying somewhat the feeling of exclusivity. That was probably a subliminal factor in my purchase decision. I am thankful that Honda has been financially successful enough with their mainstream cars to be able to develop a "poor man's NSX" as more of a marketing/exhibition project than a profit center.
  • jimxojimxo Member Posts: 423
    I'm willing to blow 35k on my next car. I'm torn between getting another sedan such as the next generation Maxima/I35/G35 or a pre-driven Q45, or a Z350. If the Z gets a Turbo in 2004 I'm sold. I currently drive a 2000 Maxima SE and was really surprised the new Altima was as quick as they say it is. If the new Z cant beat the Altima I'll go for the sedan.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    ..when I was trying to decide on replacing my 1995 Maxima SE with a 530i or getting a Honda S2000 as a third car (did the latter). Here you seem to be deciding between replacing a sedan with either another sedan or two seater.

    All I can say is if the Z can't beat the new Altima, Nissan is in very deep do-do.
  • flyingfish176flyingfish176 Member Posts: 22
    I noticed that about BMW too. It seems a little odd to me. I've made a mental note not to shop BMW's when I buy my next car.

    I've used the exchange rate of $0.63USD/$CAD, which is equal to about $1.58. Today's rate is $0.6402, the lowest it got was 0.6251.

    As much as we'd like Nissan to come out with a Z packed with technology and selling in price ranges that give it "exclusivity", I fear that would lead to either the Z's demise or Nissan's demise, or even both. (Oops, I forgot. That already happened.)

    I think Nissan has great potential in the North American market, and they're not cashing in on it. In my opinion, the Z isn't going to help them tap that wealth of potential customers. There are so many things that they could do better, like their rather poor entry-level luxury sedan, the G20. Most people see it as just a Sentra in disguise, and it really doesn't sell well.

    A viable option would be to bring over the Skyline from Japan: it's price range in the Japanese market is approximately USD$20,500 - $25,500 (perfect!), it's got great styling and more power than anything else in its class (215hp at base-level, 260hp option). And a coupe. It's like Nissan's North American branch has never heard of a coupe before! I know, I say that in almost every post. Imagine I must think it's important.

    Don't get me wrong, I'd love for Nissan to offer the Z. But if they stake their entire North American business on just the Z, they're going to evaporate before too long.
  • dohc32vdohc32v Member Posts: 60
    >>>>The mustang is ugly. It has a big nose heavy front end. It understeers pretty bad. It is too long, too wide, and too heavy to be competitive. It handles like a whale(the cobra only slightly better than the GT). And it has a cheap and ugly interior. There is a reason why people are snooty about not driving a mustang.<<<<<<

    Yes they handle terribly, that is why Car and Driver rated the Cobra R as the best road holding car for 2001 at 0.99g. Wake up and smell the flowers. The Germans just wish they could build a better machine for the money.
Sign In or Register to comment.