An eBay auction for the first 350Z off the production line ended yesterday afternoon, with proceeds going to a cancer foundation. It was a Track, with options bringing the MSRP to $37K. The final selling price was...
Oh yeah... forget all about Camaros and 240SXs... give us the GTOs and Z-Cars... being the crotchety old men we are, we don't want any affordable sporty cars left in the market for our kids... they should drive SCIONs or something... yeah...
Except for the fact that Nissan cancelled the S15 Silvia without bringing it over, and it seems that if they bring it back, like the Camaro, there will be at least a three-year-long wait for any new decent inexpensive new sport coupes (as opposed to sport roadster/liftbacks/240Z impersonators) to hit the market.
Sentras, Altimas, Maximas, oh my... why do we need so many sedans? BMW envy, perhaps? 350Z nice, but if you find one under $33K east of California (where a lot of Americans live, east of California... I know, difficult concept), I'd be surprised.
I've seen a few 240SX and 300ZX recently. Still drooling!
I was out on the Pacific Coast Hoghway here in CA the other day, and the new Z just cruised by like it was nothing! I was left with two impressions: (1) it looks a lot less like the old Z cars than I thought from the pictures, and (2) it looks an AWFUL LOT like the G35 coupe - very chunky and hunkered down. I love the Z emblems, though.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Come up to the Sonoma and Napa Valleys and you can watch my Z drive over the hill on the Oakville Grade most weekday mornings and afternoons. This is a very challenging road with lots of tight corners and a few hairpins. The Z is quite capable on this road, but does struggle against the traction control on the tight uphill righthand hairpin. I work at one of the wineries and catch a lot of tourists taking their picture with my car. I should start charging money.
I just stopped by the local dealer, and they had four. I say 'had' because one drove out as I stood there. The four were the Desert (bronze), silver, red, and white. One "Enthusiast" and the rest "Touring." All of them are sold, so I couldn't sit in them, let alone drive one.
There were four salesmen, three customers, including me, and the couple who now own the Z.
Clearly the sales staff aren't interested in selling the car -- they don't know squat about it (one of them told me the only difference between the Touring and the Performance was the presence of an automatic. This is the same trog who once told me they're only making a "thousand or so."), and they've all turned into order-takers. I was greeted with "Put in an order. If it comes and you don't like it you don't have to take it. And there won't be one to test drive for a good six months."
Another guy says "You oughta put in an order. You'd look good in it!" Image selling, i.e., just like I got when I went to look at the BMW roadster when it first came out. Sorry, I'm more into performance, and like I said, these guys are still clueless.
I'm guessing the couple who bought the Desert (bronze) are up for image as the lady seemed uninterested in the car's details and just drove away. I can say that the exhaust makes a nice V6 rumble at idle, and sounds like it's winding even though she pulled away easy.
It does look as though the cars being shipped (from this experience and the web pages of other dealers in the area) are primarily Touring models. I would guess they want to grab the higher profit, first-on-the-block sales.
Enough about the salesmen and that part.
I went in prepared to place an order. But I'm going to wait, probably quite awhile. I'll stick with my old roadster for a few months. I don't like to buy on emotion (as you certainly can't trust the accuracy or the honesty of what the sales staff says), and I can only think of four times in my life that I've been as moved visually by a car as this. (I think a test drive right now would have me trying to drive like I could 30 years ago.)
The first time over-the-top was when my dad took me down to the dealer to look at the new '53 Corvette. (He didn't buy it because he didn't like the way it drove.) The next was when he came home with his XK140, and then the XK-E hit the streets and I nearly dropped out of school so I could buy a used 4.2 coupe. There were 30 years of drudge cars after that until my friend showed me his beautifully restored 308GTB (Ferrari roadster).
Visually, I think this car is in the same class: absolutely beautiful.
Someone said the front end looks like it doesn't belong. Nonsense. It is aggressive, a very real hood scoop that may be a foot deep and 3 feet wide and will look like you're about to fall in the Grand Canyon if the car comes up behind you on a track.
Seveeral have commented on the high beltline. It sure is. A few said it was too high or that it looks like the TT. No way. I measured: the beltline isn't higher than any other car, but the top is quite a bit lower ... so maybe it looks like a chopped 49 chevy fastback(lol). The beltline on the TT makes it look squat -- with a fastback the Z looks sleek, very sleek, and (having a long history with cars), much like the Porsche exotics of the '60s.
The rear view reminds me more of the XKE than anything else right now. Maybe I'll think of something else when I calm down.
The car is just plain gorgeous. Someone said it looked fat, not like the Zs of history. The 240 design was linear and angular with curves added to break it up, knifelike. THis is sleek and designed to move through the air without disturbing it much, let alone cutting it.
Some cars are derivative, and you can find examples in every Mitsubishi, Chevy, Ford, and so on shop. In fact, it's impossible to design a car that isn't derivative since they all need most of the same equipment and details. The trick is to get it all to hang together, I think. The new Z, I think, has more references to exotics than it does to street cars.
But of course the reviewers always have to find something to say in their 'thumbs-down' part of the review, like "not a BMW." A few years ago, Audi brought the A6 out, a ground-breaking design that many others are now using as a base for their own near-fastback designs. Edmunds' reviewers criticized the taillights,for godsake, because they look like those on an S-10 pickup. They didn't like the look of the car -- but saying it with that kind of idiotic comparison is akin to saying that the Corvette, which has four tail lights in pairs, got the idea from a semi trailer. The technique damns by association, implying that the vehicle looks like a truck ..... Who cares?
I don't often post here, but I went on so long this time because the car is very exciting, beautiful, and not something I should drive or buy until I can get more objective. One thing I know for sure: the design WORKS.
Nothing worse than salesmen who don't know the cars they're selling. Even worse...their tactics must work with someone!
I once had a toolbox tell me to spend an extra 1000 on an automatic. Why? "Your resale will be higher." How much? "At least 700-800 higher!" Well, I'm sold give me a more expensive option that will surely lose money and that I do not desire. Brilliant!
The pictures have been very nice. But you'll have to see the real thing, as you know from all the disappointments with other releases, to decide what you think.
Thanks for the support.
I finally thought of something I didn't care for: too many Z's all over the body.
Speaking of too many Z's, I noticed when I left my door ajar, that there is a Z on the connection between the dash and the door vents. I just cracked up when I discovered this.
If you take a look at roadandtrack.com they have an article about the 350Z. They were able to get a 5.6sec 0-60 time along with 14.3 through the quarter mile. What's more interesting to me though is the manner in which they were able to achieve these numbers. The tester comments that they used a 2000 rpm drop clutch launch and lift throttle shifts. This means that it shouldn't be too difficult for the average driver to get numbers that are at least fairly close to that of the mags. I mean sure the S2000 is capable of similar acceleration but you would have to launch at something ridiculous like 6000 rpm to pull it off.
On the other hand, the S2000 flies from 6000 to 9000 rpm and the 350Z redlines at a rather unsporting 6,500, the same as my Maxima. No doubt, the 350Z and S2000 are very different driving experiences. Not to mention that one is a 3,300 lb fixed roof coupe and the other is a 2,800 lb open air roadster.
P.S. I think it was Motor Trend that tested the S2000 by launching it at 6,000 rpm. But they got 0-60 in 5.2 and a 13.9 quarter mile out of a brand new car (i.e. and the S2000 is known to gain power after 3,000 miles). If I'm not mistaken R&T took it a bit easier. All of this happens to be somewhat irrelevant to me, since I don't drag race from a standing start at stoplights. Engine flexibility, handling and steering are my priorities.
I finally saw a Z today on I-96. It was the burnt orance, big wheels, female driver. She was holding the line on speed limit when I pulled up even. The car was the same width as my S2k or a Miata and didn't seem to be any longer, however it was much, much taller---taller front hood, ceiling and rear trunk. Can't say I liked the dimensions. That said, the side profile with those big wheels flush in the wheel wells was very, very cool. Nissan even outdid Porsche in fitting the right rims into the right wheelwells.
Of course, I honked, she waved, we hammered it and did a 70-to-100 sprint and the Z didn't seem to strain in doing it. Couldn't tell if it was a manual or auto that she was driving, but I'm pretty sure the rims were 18". I wanted to stick around longer but I had to take an exit.
Very nice car. If it weren't for what they're doing to nissan.com, I'd even consider one.
They had a Z car show in Knoxville, TN today. And of course thay had the show so thay could introduce the new Z. So I had to go see it.
It looked fantastic. It looks much better in person than in pictures. The show was at a Knoxville dealership.
An 18 wheeler pulled into the dealership lot around 9 this morning. It had 2 new Z's on it (one silver and one red.) They unloaded the silver one and drove it into the garage, but they left the red one on the truck (later I found out it was headed for a different dealership.) Both of them looked great.
About an hour later they finally pulled the silver one out of the garage (I guess it took time to prep & clean it.) They pulled it right out onto the lot for everyone to see, but they left the doors locked (so you could only peer into the windows if you wanted to look at the interior.) There was a note in the front window stating that the car belonged to some female (I forgot the name) and the note asked not to touch the car since it had already been sold.
It was an automatic "Touring" model with spoilers. Overall this is one sweet car. The bar in the back window is much more pronounced than shown in the magazines. This car is going to be a winner.
I beg to differ. I'll judge when I see them next to each other, but right now since I'm not a track junkie, I think the G35c is ahead (similar lines as the 350, more luxury, pretty close performance, and a back seat--works for me). Each has its own advantages, it just depends on what you are looking for. Both have similar lines and that make them both considerations. Since I'm not in the market anytime soon, I'll be waiting for the convertible.
Here is a pic of a G35c Convertible that was photoshopped on the web somewhere. Both cars have soul IMO, thanks for your opinion.
And I do NOT think the G35 Convertible will ever be made, but we can dream.
Some of the criticisms I might have of the 350Z as a sports car - overweight, design/engineering compromises (i.e.shared engine & chassis components), etc, do NOT apply as much to the G35 coupe, since it isn't intended to be a sports car.
I could even see the convertible G35 coupe as a nice affordable alternative to the CLK and 330cic, even though I cringe when I think of a 3,500+/- lb convertible 350Z. I'll take my S2000 over the 350Z as a pure sports car, but from what I see and hear, the G35 coupe may be one of the best <$40k coupes on the market.
If they're doing a Z ragtop, i'd be really shocked if the G35C didn't get one too. BMW has a ragtop, Audi has one, so it seems likely Infiniti will want to do battle with the heavyweights.
Let the nissan.com thing go. You aren't going to be able to accomplish anything by not buying one. I know you want a Nissan....C'mon now!?!?....C'mon!!!??? Heh Heh!
That said, I still love my Maxima! I WOULD however kill for traction control and an IRS, but I can wait. This car has just been too good to me and I can get over these small inconveniences.
If you remember the original 300ZX sold for over $30,000 and Nissan was pricing itself out of the market. When Nissan decided to build the new sports car "The 350Z", they had to find a way to cut costs. The solution is the car is manufactured with RECYCLED METAL. I'm not an expert on metals, but I do know what happened when other manufactures were building there cars from recycled metal. Most dealers are asking full over sticker for the 350Z. I believe a prospective buyer should be very careful before paying full sticker for any vehicle that is built with recycled metal
the 350Z is cheaper than the 90-96 300ZX twin turbo because it's lower tech, for the time.
the 300zx tt had every ounce of technology Nissan could muster, and little expense was spared and little thought given to practicality.
the 350Z came to be under Ghosn's accountant eye and HAD to be cheaper, more focused and more profitable. in my opinion it's still too expensive, considering the base model shamefully has no limited-slip differential. not sure how you can meaningfully use 280HP without one...
The 350Z is cheaper because it shares parts and its platform with other Nissan cars. The Z's FM platform is also used for the Infiniti G35/G35 coupe. The Z's engine is used across Nissan's model line. Platform sharing and part sharing creates economies of scale, so the Z is economical to make, therefore it is cheaper than older "specialized" sport cars that Nissan made in the past.
Everything in my/our life is recycled/hybrid/alloy... and so on. I wonder why the metal issue is supposed to be an incriminating issue. Even bottled water isn't pure. And if the metal were pure ... no one since Fred Flintstone wants to drive a rock.
There are two niche markets, I think, for this car. One is the lady who gets one from her S.O. This is the best possible copy to buy used. The other market is the performance nut who can buy one for "sport." The boy racer, the young family guy, and so on will find this too much of a toy.
A very, very beautiful toy. And because of its limited (purchasing) audience, if it isn't slick as snot to drive, it won't be around long unless it transforms itself into another cruiser.
The Z had to be kept less expensive. The higher prices are already occupied by the boxster and its followers (literally). In this price range its only real mass competition will be the S2k, obviously, and some well-tuned Miatae, MR2s ... all of them 4 cyl., none of them fixed roof. The car advances the debate at all the local events; except it still has to compete against more expensive cars on any given Sunday. That's why so many of us are waiting to see what it has, not in a magazine but on the autoX, rally, and time trial events.
In terms of sales, it seems obvious that the new Z raises the stakes considerably. In terms of performance, the decision hasn't even begun but the hopes are high.
I told you that the local dealer had 4 delivered, and I saw the first in its new, blonde owner's hands. The dealer called me over the weekend. it seems that someone didn't pick up their new Touring toy and he said: "The car is available for sale, and perhaps for a test drive." PERHAPS
Of course I called him back (want to keep the door of discussion open) and let him know I wasn't interested in a Touring but wanted Performance or Track (depending on which drove the way I want, if either), and whether I bought or not would depend on a Loooong test drive and whether the car's performance was interesting enough.
I'm sure he'll tell me about 0-60 when he talks about performance. He's an order taker, that's about it.
Test drove Touring Z last week. Had to agree on price before being "allowed" to take a test drive. Wouldn't be "allowed" unless I agreed in principle to "about" $4K over list. After I said, "sure, whatever" I was permitted to drive. Before I launch I'm thinking to myself, "over $40+tax, hmmm, why not a late low miles vette instead." So I finish the drive and I think the Z machine was OK but not overly impressive (considering chunky premium). Of course, hard to put it through anything rigorous with delimiting saleman next to you during drive. Went back into showroom and told Sales Manager, "not real impressed -- and my butt doesn't fit in the seat" He thinks my rear problem is a hoot so he yells it out to all the sales knobs standing around in the showroom. What a tool. I'm 6'4" 220 lbs. I'm not a fat guy but I guess I'm relatively big. This car was made by midgets and they don't understand people over 6 feet tall and 200 lbs. Anyway, Sales Mgr told me to walk if I didn't want to pay the premium. I said, "thanks for the spin, call me when you want to deal" Got a call yesterday from some sales lady at same dealer. She says, "got another one, you still interested?" I say, "sure -- but not for anything over list." She says come on in and we'll talk. I'm thinking I'll wait until the snow flies -- price already dropped $4K in a week. Wonder if they can sweeten the deal by throw'n in an American sized seat? Or, maybe someone can recommend a doctor for Japanese buttectomy? Doomed to drive a truck I reck'n.
Just a quick rave for my favorite little underdog car here, the Subie WRX...at 227 hp and weighing over 500 pounds less, the car mags all get mid-5 seconds 0-60 times in it, which is about the same as this car, for AT LEAST $5K less in price, and four seats PLUS AWD into the bargain! Right now you can bargain a WRX down at least to $22K, making the real price differential even more than that $5K, probably a lot closer to $8K in the real world...
Where's the advantage again? I know , I know, the whole universe seems to agree the WRX is ugly, and I will not be one to contradict the universe! But there are plenty of stylish sports cars and sport coupes out there, so in that respect the Z is just one of the crowd.
OK, I am done splashing cold water around, if someone wants to flame, there will be nothing to put it out!! :-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
this is even nuttier than the last post I responded to!
a) the WRX is hardly svelte at 3085lb for the sedan. the 350Z is 3200-3275lb depending on configuration. I stopped at CalculusII, but I'm still reasonably sure that's around 200lb and a far cry from 500.
b) the WRX will do 0-60 in less than six seconds (about 5.7 typically) and the quarter mile in 14.6-14.8 seconds ONLY with a wickedly brutal AWD launch. it is much slower if you drive it with any mechanical sympathy, which most owners would. and if they don't, they'll be in the shop for non-warrantied repairs.
c) the Z isn't meant to compete head-to-head with the WRX. in fact, neither car really has much direct competition if you care deeply about everything each has to offer and the price ranges they occupy.
a little off in your acceleration figures. My WRX wagon w/just a clutch slip can do 0to60 in 5.8 as measured by a friend's G-tech (this was well before the Vishnu Stage 0 upgrade). The sedan is usually a tenth of a second quicker so 5.6 or 5.7 is right in the ballpark. With a brutal clutch drop your going to see closer to 5.2 to 5.3 secs for the sedan. Additionally, the figures you see for the Z are not polite launches, pretty much slipping the clutch, if not worse. Don't get me wrong, I love the new Z and were it not for my WRX wagon, I would be looking into trying one on for size. :-)
I just wanted to add I never meant to imply these two cars were supposed to compete head to head - they are kind of in different worlds.
BUT if your top priority is sportiness, and you are looking at price as a factor in your decision, there is still nothing out there that can beat the WRX for bang for the buck, and that includes the Z.
BTW, one of the car mag reviews I read of the WRX described the launch they did to get the best 0-60 times, and they were launching from 3500 rpm - heck, that is almost what I would normally launch from anyway!
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Three things make the Z far more attractive to me over a Rex:
RWD V6 Leather
Yeah, yeah, I've heard all the babble about cloth is good for this or that...when Porsche, Lambo and Ferrari start selling cars with cloth come talk to me. Until then, real sports cars come with supportive leather seats.
For me it depends on what type of cloth or leather is in the car. If the cloth is nice and grippy I opt for cloth over leather. The alacantra leather (suede) that Audi uses in the S4 is perfect - it has more grip than cloth.
As far as the Z competing with WRX ect. I don't think it's much of a stretch for people looking for performance as their top priority. I plan to take a Z out for a test once all the hype dies down. The Nissan dealer I went to is charging a 10% premium and had a big chart on the wall of all their incomming Z's, about half were spoken for. I doubt the hype will last all that long, a couple months at the most.
stephen I'm not going to argue semantics with you, especially since I don't care enough to dig and cite material. I am pretty darned sure however that last year when the WRX debuts Grassroots Motorsports observed a 0-60 in the 6.4 second range when accelerating briskly, but being kind to the clutch and transmission. If they dropped the clutch at high rpm, they saw the time drop into the 5.7s range.
if you have documented proof otherwise I'll consider it. a g-tech pro is not considered a worthy instrument, by the way.
when you accelerate at maximum effort in a RWD car, the clutch and transmission see a whole lot less stress because they are being resisted by only two tires, instead of four. abuse is abuse, no argument there, but 2WD vehicles by nature can take much more of it.
For me it depends on what type of cloth or leather is in the car. If the cloth is nice and grippy I opt for cloth over leather. The alacantra leather (suede) that Audi uses in the S4 is perfect - it has more grip than cloth.
As far as the Z competing with WRX ect. I don't think it's much of a stretch for people looking for performance as their top priority. I plan to take a Z out for a test once all the hype dies down. The Nissan dealer I went to is charging a 10% premium and had a big chart on the wall of all their incomming Z's, about half were spoken for. I doubt the hype will last all that long, a couple months at the most.
Comments
http://cgi6.ebay.com/ebaymotors/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&item=1852747075
Okay, okay, I'll tell you: $95,100. If you have time, check the "Bid History" on eBay. I happened to catch the last 10 minutes, and it was thrilling.
And still have money left for Lo-Jacks!
For each car!
whotheman
That is what I'M talking about!
We can have both, ok???
Obi
Sentras, Altimas, Maximas, oh my... why do we need so many sedans? BMW envy, perhaps? 350Z nice, but if you find one under $33K east of California (where a lot of Americans live, east of California... I know, difficult concept), I'd be surprised.
I've seen a few 240SX and 300ZX recently. Still drooling!
A 240sx couldn't even waste a Prelude, let alone a Camaro or Corvette.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Mario Andretti drives nice cars.
Shoes works at a winery.
Shoes drives nice cars.
Shoes = Mario Andretti? Hmm....
There were four salesmen, three customers, including me, and the couple who now own the Z.
Clearly the sales staff aren't interested in selling the car -- they don't know squat about it (one of them told me the only difference between the Touring and the Performance was the presence of an automatic. This is the same trog who once told me they're only making a "thousand or so."), and they've all turned into order-takers. I was greeted with "Put in an order. If it comes and you don't like it you don't have to take it. And there won't be one to test drive for a good six months."
Another guy says "You oughta put in an order. You'd look good in it!" Image selling, i.e., just like I got when I went to look at the BMW roadster when it first came out. Sorry, I'm more into performance, and like I said, these guys are still clueless.
I'm guessing the couple who bought the Desert (bronze) are up for image as the lady seemed uninterested in the car's details and just drove away. I can say that the exhaust makes a nice V6 rumble at idle, and sounds like it's winding even though she pulled away easy.
It does look as though the cars being shipped (from this experience and the web pages of other dealers in the area) are primarily Touring models. I would guess they want to grab the higher profit, first-on-the-block sales.
Enough about the salesmen and that part.
I went in prepared to place an order. But I'm going to wait, probably quite awhile. I'll stick with my old roadster for a few months. I don't like to buy on emotion (as you certainly can't trust the accuracy or the honesty of what the sales staff says), and I can only think of four times in my life that I've been as moved visually by a car as this. (I think a test drive right now would have me trying to drive like I could 30 years ago.)
The first time over-the-top was when my dad took me down to the dealer to look at the new '53 Corvette. (He didn't buy it because he didn't like the way it drove.) The next was when he came home with his XK140, and then the XK-E hit the streets and I nearly dropped out of school so I could buy a used 4.2 coupe. There were 30 years of drudge cars after that until my friend showed me his beautifully restored 308GTB (Ferrari roadster).
Visually, I think this car is in the same class: absolutely beautiful.
Someone said the front end looks like it doesn't belong. Nonsense. It is aggressive, a very real hood scoop that may be a foot deep and 3 feet wide and will look like you're about to fall in the Grand Canyon if the car comes up behind you on a track.
Seveeral have commented on the high beltline. It sure is. A few said it was too high or that it looks like the TT. No way. I measured: the beltline isn't higher than any other car, but the top is quite a bit lower ... so maybe it looks like a chopped 49 chevy fastback(lol). The beltline on the TT makes it look squat -- with a fastback the Z looks sleek, very sleek, and (having a long history with cars), much like the Porsche exotics of the '60s.
The rear view reminds me more of the XKE than anything else right now. Maybe I'll think of something else when I calm down.
The car is just plain gorgeous. Someone said it looked fat, not like the Zs of history. The 240 design was linear and angular with curves added to break it up, knifelike. THis is sleek and designed to move through the air without disturbing it much, let alone cutting it.
Some cars are derivative, and you can find examples in every Mitsubishi, Chevy, Ford, and so on shop. In fact, it's impossible to design a car that isn't derivative since they all need most of the same equipment and details. The trick is to get it all to hang together, I think. The new Z, I think, has more references to exotics than it does to street cars.
But of course the reviewers always have to find something to say in their 'thumbs-down'
part of the review, like "not a BMW." A few years ago, Audi brought the A6 out, a ground-breaking design that many others are now using as a base for their own near-fastback designs. Edmunds' reviewers criticized the taillights,for godsake, because they look like those on an S-10 pickup. They didn't like the look of the car -- but saying it with that kind of idiotic comparison is akin to saying that the Corvette, which has four tail lights in pairs, got the idea from a semi trailer. The technique damns by association, implying that the vehicle looks like a truck ..... Who cares?
I don't often post here, but I went on so long this time because the car is very exciting, beautiful, and not something I should drive or buy until I can get more objective. One thing I know for sure: the design WORKS.
Take care.
Joe W.
I once had a toolbox tell me to spend an extra 1000 on an automatic. Why? "Your resale will be higher." How much? "At least 700-800 higher!" Well, I'm sold give me a more expensive option that will surely lose money and that I do not desire. Brilliant!
How do you feel about the new Infiniti G35 coupe due in November???
Cheers,
Thanks for the support.
I finally thought of something I didn't care for: too many Z's all over the body.
Go Bluejays.
Joe W.
P.S. I think it was Motor Trend that tested the S2000 by launching it at 6,000 rpm. But they got 0-60 in 5.2 and a 13.9 quarter mile out of a brand new car (i.e. and the S2000 is known to gain power after 3,000 miles). If I'm not mistaken R&T took it a bit easier. All of this happens to be somewhat irrelevant to me, since I don't drag race from a standing start at stoplights. Engine flexibility, handling and steering are my priorities.
Of course, I honked, she waved, we hammered it and did a 70-to-100 sprint and the Z didn't seem to strain in doing it. Couldn't tell if it was a manual or auto that she was driving, but I'm pretty sure the rims were 18". I wanted to stick around longer but I had to take an exit.
Very nice car. If it weren't for what they're doing to nissan.com, I'd even consider one.
It looked fantastic. It looks much better in person than in pictures. The show was at a Knoxville dealership.
An 18 wheeler pulled into the dealership lot around 9 this morning. It had 2 new Z's on it (one silver and one red.) They unloaded the silver one and drove it into the garage, but they left the red one on the truck (later I found out it was headed for a different dealership.) Both of them looked great.
About an hour later they finally pulled the silver one out of the garage (I guess it took time to prep & clean it.) They pulled it right out onto the lot for everyone to see, but they left the doors locked (so you could only peer into the windows if you wanted to look at the interior.) There was a note in the front window stating that the car belonged to some female (I forgot the name) and the note asked not to touch the car since it had already been sold.
It was an automatic "Touring" model with spoilers. Overall this is one sweet car. The bar in the back window is much more pronounced than shown in the magazines. This car is going to be a winner.
Here is a pic of a G35c Convertible that was photoshopped on the web somewhere. Both cars have soul IMO, thanks for your opinion.
And I do NOT think the G35 Convertible will ever be made, but we can dream.
Some of the criticisms I might have of the 350Z as a sports car - overweight, design/engineering compromises (i.e.shared engine & chassis components), etc, do NOT apply as much to the G35 coupe, since it isn't intended to be a sports car.
I could even see the convertible G35 coupe as a nice affordable alternative to the CLK and 330cic, even though I cringe when I think of a 3,500+/- lb convertible 350Z. I'll take my S2000 over the 350Z as a pure sports car, but from what I see and hear, the G35 coupe may be one of the best <$40k coupes on the market.
That said, I still love my Maxima! I WOULD however kill for traction control and an IRS, but I can wait. This car has just been too good to me and I can get over these small inconveniences.
Obi
When Nissan decided to build the new sports car "The 350Z", they had to find a way to cut costs.
The solution is the car is manufactured with RECYCLED METAL. I'm not an expert on metals, but I do know what happened when other manufactures were building there cars from recycled metal. Most dealers are asking full over sticker for the 350Z. I believe a prospective buyer should
be very careful before paying full sticker for any vehicle that is built with recycled metal
the 350Z is cheaper than the 90-96 300ZX twin turbo because it's lower tech, for the time.
the 300zx tt had every ounce of technology Nissan could muster, and little expense was spared and little thought given to practicality.
the 350Z came to be under Ghosn's accountant eye and HAD to be cheaper, more focused and more profitable. in my opinion it's still too expensive, considering the base model shamefully has no limited-slip differential. not sure how you can meaningfully use 280HP without one...
-Colin
....the steel issue merits additional input from the author.................ez
There are two niche markets, I think, for this car. One is the lady who gets one from her S.O. This is the best possible copy to buy used. The other market is the performance nut who can buy one for "sport." The boy racer, the young family guy, and so on will find this too much of a toy.
A very, very beautiful toy. And because of its limited (purchasing) audience, if it isn't slick as snot to drive, it won't be around long unless it transforms itself into another cruiser.
The Z had to be kept less expensive. The higher prices are already occupied by the boxster and its followers (literally). In this price range its only real mass competition will be the S2k, obviously, and some well-tuned Miatae, MR2s ... all of them 4 cyl., none of them fixed roof. The car advances the debate at all the local events; except it still has to compete against more expensive cars on any given Sunday. That's why so many of us are waiting to see what it has, not in a magazine but on the autoX, rally, and time trial events.
In terms of sales, it seems obvious that the new Z raises the stakes considerably. In terms of performance, the decision hasn't even begun but the hopes are high.
I told you that the local dealer had 4 delivered, and I saw the first in its new, blonde owner's hands. The dealer called me over the weekend. it seems that someone didn't pick up their new Touring toy and he said: "The car is available for sale, and perhaps for a test drive." PERHAPS
Of course I called him back (want to keep the door of discussion open) and let him know I wasn't interested in a Touring but wanted Performance or Track (depending on which drove the way I want, if either), and whether I bought or not would depend on a Loooong test drive and whether the car's performance was interesting enough.
I'm sure he'll tell me about 0-60 when he talks about performance. He's an order taker, that's about it.
Go Bluejays.
Joe W.
Where's the advantage again? I know , I know, the whole universe seems to agree the WRX is ugly, and I will not be one to contradict the universe! But there are plenty of stylish sports cars and sport coupes out there, so in that respect the Z is just one of the crowd.
OK, I am done splashing cold water around, if someone wants to flame, there will be nothing to put it out!! :-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
a) the WRX is hardly svelte at 3085lb for the sedan. the 350Z is 3200-3275lb depending on configuration. I stopped at CalculusII, but I'm still reasonably sure that's around 200lb and a far cry from 500.
b) the WRX will do 0-60 in less than six seconds (about 5.7 typically) and the quarter mile in 14.6-14.8 seconds ONLY with a wickedly brutal AWD launch. it is much slower if you drive it with any mechanical sympathy, which most owners would. and if they don't, they'll be in the shop for non-warrantied repairs.
c) the Z isn't meant to compete head-to-head with the WRX. in fact, neither car really has much direct competition if you care deeply about everything each has to offer and the price ranges they occupy.
-Colin
BTW, I completely agree w/your last statement!
Stephen
BUT if your top priority is sportiness, and you are looking at price as a factor in your decision, there is still nothing out there that can beat the WRX for bang for the buck, and that includes the Z.
BTW, one of the car mag reviews I read of the WRX described the launch they did to get the best 0-60 times, and they were launching from 3500 rpm - heck, that is almost what I would normally launch from anyway!
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
RWD
V6
Leather
Yeah, yeah, I've heard all the babble about cloth is good for this or that...when Porsche, Lambo and Ferrari start selling cars with cloth come talk to me. Until then, real sports cars come with supportive leather seats.
As far as the Z competing with WRX ect. I don't think it's much of a stretch for people looking for performance as their top priority. I plan to take a Z out for a test once all the hype dies down. The Nissan dealer I went to is charging a 10% premium and had a big chart on the wall of all their incomming Z's, about half were spoken for. I doubt the hype will last all that long, a couple months at the most.
if you have documented proof otherwise I'll consider it. a g-tech pro is not considered a worthy instrument, by the way.
when you accelerate at maximum effort in a RWD car, the clutch and transmission see a whole lot less stress because they are being resisted by only two tires, instead of four. abuse is abuse, no argument there, but 2WD vehicles by nature can take much more of it.
-Colin
As far as the Z competing with WRX ect. I don't think it's much of a stretch for people looking for performance as their top priority. I plan to take a Z out for a test once all the hype dies down. The Nissan dealer I went to is charging a 10% premium and had a big chart on the wall of all their incomming Z's, about half were spoken for. I doubt the hype will last all that long, a couple months at the most.