Road & Track: 370Z vs Cayman S

Lug

Not with most. The best is a 4.7 but only Motor Trend got that. Car and Driver just got a 4.8 here Nissan 370Z vs. BMW 135i, Mazda RX-8 R3, and Pontiac Solstice GXP. Edmunds and Motorweek both got a 5.1 but they tend to be about .2 slower than everyone else on almost all cars. Road and Track originally got a 5.1 but blamed elevation for at least .1 of that and have gotten a smidge slower here. I just don't recall number varying this widely on most cars. Best example would be something like a Mustang usually which stays between 5.1 and 5.3 on everybody's reviews. We seem to have a full 1/2 second swing with the nissan. Makes me wonder if it might be overly temp or elevation sensitive. But another problem in this article is that they have a 3530 curb weight, the heaviest I've ever seen for a 370Z.

__________________
keep Chubbs in your pocket - Chubbs

!xoible

wow 4.7! my car doesnt even get a 4.7 lol so how do they get a 4.7 then 1/4 mile in high 13's? they're either lying about the 4.7, or what ^^ says above that 3-up gears are too long.

Endgame

This does not bother me much as it seems to remind me of the articles that painted the 350z as being 3600 pounds. I SERIOUSLY doubt this car is as heavy as a Maxima...

I, for one, believe Nissan's numbers from the factory with the addition of the Sports pack (being about 50 pounds)....

FairmanZ

The curb weight is listed as 3360 lbs, about the same as in the MT & C&D tests. It's the test weight that is shown as 3530, but that includes the driver weight. R&T always includes the weight of their drivers in the "test" weight.

!xoible

why would you assume so? the VQ obviously chokes and has a hard time revving up to give the extra hp. still gotta remember the VQ is still a bored out version of a 3.0 liter. nissan needs a new engine soon

klubbheads

That is not the reason. HR motors perform beautifully all the way till redline. My bimmer chockes after 6k rpm and has 1000rpm (from 6k-7k) dead spot.
The reason is that the gears are too tall for the G37/370z. from 2nd gear all the way to fifth are very long considering the car has a high-reving motor. If the gear ratios were the same as the first gen G35 with 6th gear actually being a gear not overdrive, then this car would have been much much quicker. As people start putting 4.01 FD on this car which i will probably do, you will see how much difference it makes in the acceleration.

klubbheads

^When it comes to 0-60, i dont really care what it does. When it comes to conditions, yes they can make up to 1 second difference in 1/4 mile. When i was comparing the numbers that they have on the PDF file, i am assuming both cars are tested on same day. I really don't look at the numbers just to know what they do. I like seeing comparisons to other similar performing car to get an fairly accurate idea how fast the car is. Even a car with bad 0-60 or even 1/4 mile time can outperform a different car is tripple digit speeds. The perfect example is stock Evo/STI vs 6MT 03-06 G35.

klubbheads

^every NA car is elevation sensative.

Lug

hence the term "overly"

__________________
keep Chubbs in your pocket - Chubbs

klubbheads

My g35 made 0.6 second difference in 1/4 mile in 2500 elevation difference with very similar weather conditions. So i guess overly is the right term.

rob_zhp

Honestly it does not matter if the 09 Cayman S beats the Z. Some examples are more than 2X the price of a new Z. Ask klubbheads, I am the biggest advocate for the new Caymans. You honestly have to drive one to experience how a sports car should be built. It is truly that good. If I could afford one right now I would buy it in a heartbeat. I would take it over a Z06 or a 911 S.

The Z is an exceptional performer and given a slightly better driver in the Z I would bet that it would outperform the Cayman, 911, or most other earthly sports cars. I cant tell you how many driver I have seen in 500 + HP cars get their asses handed to them by 200 HP Boxsters and S2000's.

So for the price it commands I would sure as hell expect the Cayman to outperform the Z. But the Z is a damn good car. Best bang for your buck out there. Even better than a Z06? I think so.

My G35 Coupe was an absolute POS reliability wise and after the treatment I have received at the Nissan dealer for our 350Z, I vowed to never buy another Nissan product again.

But again these threads go on forever and ever on every forum. It comes down to whichever car you like and can afford. I think today car buying is an experience that continues throughout your ownership. I found that it is highly emotional. I have owned a number of sports cars and I found that I like Porsches the best.

355890

I have to agree......Porsche is an amazing machine. But I feel secure in knowing that while under the same breath the Z is talked about in the same circles as Porsche....this is Fantastic for the 370. I like playing in this sandbox.

A Sports car is not always about off the line 0-60 - 1/4 mile times, heck if you really wanted that straight line rush then you should be looking in the Dodge, Pontiac Showrooms.

The Z is a about driver experience, control, cornering, tight/taught machine, with a little bit of power to kick your pants. Thanks NISSAN. I'm enjoy the ride!

MightyBobo

Honestly, the Z06 doesnt have much bang for the buck on the track for GM. The C6 with the Z51 package has your true bang for the buck. For 45K or so, you get all the power 99% of people doing road racing will need with a great suspension package to go with it. You can easily get a used C6 Z51 with low miles (10-20K) for 30K or so. Way better bang for the buck, but, of course, its used.

Lug

I'd say the best bang for the buck today is the regular C6. A 430 HP, close to 4 second car, great handling, and good looks that you can currently get for $40,000. That and the Base Z with the sport option are the two value leaders in my book.

__________________
keep Chubbs in your pocket - Chubbs