Base is around $30,000
Sport is around $34,000
Nismo is around $45,000

You can find many 2015-2017 Nismo models used with under 30,000 miles for less than $30,000 on auto trader.

Edit: The new supra will be $50,000-$55,000. It is also made in Austria, has been in development for years, is just a hard top Z4, and was co-developed with BMW to save costs on developing a new sports car.

You maybe right. In 2009, the Z was having 987 Cayman like handling and made more power than a Mustang GT with the 4.6L V8. Back then, Z owners didn't mind comparing the Z to anything with 4 wheels. The Z even won the C&D comparison test against the BMW 135i, Mazda RX-8 and Pontiac Solstice. But time has changed. If there is a new Z in the near future and, once again, handles like a Cayman and makes more horsepower than a V8 muscle car, I am sure Z owners will be posting comparison test results all over the forum again. People just like to compare, especially when they are winning.

I was annoyed that he seemed upset over the Z not including rear seats for the price. Bringing up rear seats as a comparison is ridiculous, as anyone who's tried to use the rear seats in a Mustang will attest to them being quite useless outside of a backpack. Regardless of price, sports cars don't need rear seats! It's not a selling point for a sports car! He complained about the lack of a storage compartment behind the driver's seat. It's a driver-focused design with elements accessible to the driver. The gauge clusters are a staple of the Z brand - we all know the clock is redundant! The digital screen is old, but neither of those things negatively affect what the car is made for.

Yes, the NISMO, is overpriced if purchased new today, but I don't know anyone who's purchased it new. He complained about the NISMO/Z badge in various places on the car, but didn't complain about that same treatment on the Koenigsegg Agera he reviewed last year. He was actual quite fond of that on the Agera, which contradicts his own opinions. It shows that he's quite unfairly biased in his "reviews", didn't know a lot about the NISMO, and shouldn't be taken seriously.

It's a 10 year old enthusiasts car with no nanny assists, and I don't miss any of that. Just wish the NISMO started at 400WHP NA...

I agree with the above post ^

As I told you guys already, his review's get a Dougey score of 2. Some folks like him, I just don't care for his style at all.

I got my 2019 nismo with great finance rate under CDN msrp. I dont know why us pricing is exact same (47k cdn vs 47k usd) difference is yuge. Like worst deal in like the history of ever for the usa.

Lol dang this review hit a nerve, there even a rebuttal out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Slu57zARzG4

Wtf, even Harris review didn't get this much noise. So out of curiosity I watch the damn thing again. No, he doesn't like it but he also stated the following (more/less):
- faster than I expected
- decent auto transmission for not being dc
- reasonable power
- tighter, surprisingly well balanced (handling an asset)
- noise is OK, good but not 40k good (expecially compared to regular Z)
- end of life; needs a refresh (not competitive anymore)

Nothing new, nothing crazy or misleading. And to highlight his summary..

...This is a fun car, its exciting, its thrilling, it looks cool and its fast. Just not enough to justify 40K.

The Doug score just his thing and far from perfect, but there is gem in there as well
- handling is 7/10.

Totally normal for anyone to state you don't like someone, that how the internet works lol. But geez the dude drives a ford GT and gave the Z a 7/10 for handling, one of the *main* reason we own this car. Im out guys lol

That and the FOB engine start to just hold the FOB, really? Worse than that, those are touchscreens. How could he possibly miss that? You just touch a button on the screen and you'll see they work quite well. Finally, he didn't know about the button caps in the center console are for seat heaters for certain models and also a hatch release.

I agree with everything above. By the way my definition of a sports car is a "2 seater" Anything with 4 seats "even if not usable" is a muscle car !!! Nothing wrong with muscle cars, you just can't compare the two. As far as many of the big name reviewers have said, QUOTE - Z is old and needs new body style. The Z car is no different than the Corvette C3 body style that ran from 1968 all the way to 1982... Thats 14 years and the car still was appreciated and sold well. Then C4 corvette ran from 1984 to 1996, that is 12 years and that car sold well also. Not knocking Corvette at all as I owned an 81, 92, and 2002 Z06. When a manufacturer has a body style right, they can afford to leave it alone and just refine. In any event I do look forward to new styling from Nissan in the future. Hot Rod Z

Lots of cars with back seats that aren't muscle cars:

GT86/BRZ
911
older 2+2 Z's
older Supra
etc.

Let me be a bit clearer, many of the car magazines and car comparison sites suggest when looking to buy a Z to also look at Camaro, Challenger, Mustang and seem to put them in the "Sports Car" category which they are NOT ! I was not saying all 4 seat cars are muscle cars. Sorry for the misunderstanding ...

:confused:

I guess you did not read my revision to my original statement and you only picked out small parts of my original statement. Unfortunate :tiphat:

slight off topic here, but its always an interesting subject. I like to think of "muscle" cars as the ninja turtle of the car world, a beef up version of an otherwise normal car. For example

base mustang
- normal (economy) engine
- normal suspension/tires
- normal aerodynamic (smaller spoilers, etc)

muscle version
- high output engine
- larger wheels/tires
- stiffer suspension
- more aerodynamic

You won't see the ecoboost mustang being compared to the Z, a cayman or even a miata. Its going to be the GT and that cool, they are impressive but its still a bit of a wannabe sports car.

What was Dougie’s score on his Mustang’s electric power steering unit that craps out just after warranty?