i have driven all the cars you mentioned at the track, the lotus is grossly overrated. it feels great, but lap times arent really that great

here is another fun fact, my 2004 enth. weights 10lbs lighter than my 370z base sport. the difference isnt as big as you think. my rx8 06 stock at full tank was 3000lbs

ipretty intresting, just checked and it says the 350z (8:26) was 1 second behind the exige S (8:25) at Nurburgring

is this even possible? I always assumed the elise/exige would tool a z on a track.

I would think that because the 'Ring is considered a highspeed course with big braking zones the elise loses out because it doesnt have the big hp needed to get up to the higher speeds. This is what it seems like running both cars on the Ring on GT5. I know its just a game but the Ring seems to need a decent amount of power to fully exploit the high speed corners and straights.

If you look at the Top Gear Test Track wiki and the times cars have put up it evens out the gap that the Ring can introduce.

+1. The ring is a pretty high speed run, which is why pigs like the CTS-V and the GTR are still able to put up good times.

hmmmm....my grippy tires help you much more than the 60lbs saving. like the lotus, grossly overrated

under the right condition, hp almost always help. you need power to pull the car out of the corner. i am on my cell phone, but i can show you some interestiing data on what power can do on lap times

yes i drove the elise on the track. it is fun and feels great, but not my cup of tea. while handling and feel are subjective, but lap times aren't.

:iagree:

just my 2 cents worth. 99% of buyers won't track there car so they could care less about how much the pig weighs. if they can afford it and keep gas in it
to most thats all that matters... the 3 cars we are talking about might as well
not have a back seat anyway. have you ever sat in the back of one.

so my point is if nissan wont's to compete in that market and imho they already
are. the next generation Z will have to be lighter not much and better bring over
400 horse's to the track........

The 2010 Mustang is pretty irrelevant to this conversation though. The 2011 Mustang obliterates the Z.

:iagree:

This is the way I see it.

1. No one still knows what the 2012 refresh entails.

2. Musclecar to Z comparo are the stupidest comparos on the face of the earth. I don't see anyone comparing the camaro SS to the porsche boxster.

3. In the end the Z is a tuner car. There was once a time not too long ago when you bought a car like this and didn't worry about how fast it was stock. Cuz you know of its FI potential.

4. People who worry about the muscle car market zap the fun out of owning cars like these.

5. That's also why they make different types of cars. When you pay off the Z. Buy a mustang camaro etc... or just trade. Maybe you can afford both????

Either way they are different enthusiast segments. You cant maneuver a muscle car as well as a Z. Also I want to add this. Don't forget you opted for a V6 SPORTS CAR. If you want v8 power? Buy a v8. This is why after a few years japan just cuts all there cars from the US. They provide the best v6 engines on the market and the american consumer complains the v6 is not good enough. Show me a V6 musclecar that can outperform the v6 370z?????? I personally can't think of one.
Comparably, a porsche cayman has comparable specs and acceleration times @ double the cost. Why doesn't anyone complain that the cayman is slow???

:roflpuke2:

I agree with all the points you make. However, you have to look at it from a market economics point of view. The Z vs muscle car comparisons make sense in that they are both performance oriented cars in the same price range. To true performance enthusiasts, this is meaningless, but to the manufacturers and the average customer for these vehicles. This average consumer will look at price and most likely just straight line performance. They know they won't ever go to a track, so they just want to be able to go fast in a straight line and get the most horespower they can with the car stock. This point of view is important because it affects sales numbers, which ultimately effects development and importance of the Z relative to other cars in the Nissan lineup. The reason some people believe that Nissan might stop making the Z is due the low sales, which in turn are due to the comparisons against these muscle cars. Nissan does need to step up their game with the Z soon if it wants to stay relevant in these comparisons for the average consumer.

No one looking for a 5.0 Mustang or Camaro SS is cross shopping a Cayman, it's usually way out of their price range. The way they look at it, I can get almost 100 more hp and a faster car (0-60, 1/4 mile) for half the price. The market for those cars is much larger than for the Porsche. Same with the Z. They're thinking I can get almost 100 more hp and a faster car for the same price or even less.

Just my :twocents:

maybe i am not normal, but who the hell would buy a car based on fi potential? maybe i need to hang out with the fast and furious crew

Most anything has FI potential. Just take a look at what a blown or boosted ls3 puts down.

Yup, just look at those 1000 HP civics. IMO that's a stupid thing to consider when getting a car. Something that makes more sense is getting a car that comes with FI with the intent to beef it up and increase the boost.

lol yeah i agree,and its surprising since in NY you'd expect alott more of us

This.

Fast and furious has nothing to do with this. Its like that's all you guys ever bring up when anyone mentions these are tuner cars. They should have never made that freakn movie. Wayyyyy before fast and furious there were tuner cars being made since the early 70's. The first modern tuner car that came out that can be tuned from the ECU was the 82 mitsubishi starion. That car is the reason we tune cars in the way we do today. That was 20years before those stupid movies you mention.
I wouldn't buy a regular car on potential but I definately buy my sports cars on potential. Especially a 2 seat sports car with little utility. If I wanna ride around with my wife, i'd buy a sports sedan or a gt at best. Then I wouldn't worry about potential. Everyone here talks about lightweight, intakes, exhausts and FI all the time. So I don't know where you get sports cars aren't bought for there potenial. That's a laughable statement.

Anyway I enjoy the car for what it is tuned or not.

Actually, most cars have very low FI potential.

I think he meant potential for forced induction applications, not overall performance potential. I don't think I would buy a car based on its potential for forced induction potential, but overall performance potential is definitely near the top of my list.

O rly? :p

I wasn't implying you buy these cars to turbo them. I'm saying they are tuner cars capable of being wound up to be extremely fast. But when I buy a sports car I wanna know that all my options are open. Whether I FI or not. A car that can't FI doesn't sound like a durable sports car to me.
Look at the Z as a whole package, Suspension, motor, drive characteristics,capability, price then look at its best numbers stock. 4.6/13.1 155mph top with 1.01g on sport pkg and then compare. No one comes close in the V6 segment at 35k.
The mustang is an impressive v8 package. But its a different type of car. In the end v8 to v6 is a pointless arguement. When the v6 mustang camaro challenger and genesis coupe are out performing a Z bone stock. I will say the Z needs to beef up.

To get better performance you still need more cylinders or more cash. In the end I'm just glad I can add an extra 125hp for about 8grand. That's just me though...:driving:

You can tune everything if you have money. I can make a Geo Metro fast if I want to. At the end of the day, it's your money and chances are that no one really gives a flying f.....

Not necessarily. There is almost always a good bit of headroom in modern engines. It's just that some folks expect too much and start thinking that 12 psi on stock motor with cast pistons is safe. If they have a good tune and stick with the wastgate spring (7-8 psi), modern motors hold up just fine.

Most modern motors don't really have much headroom, and there often isn't aftermarket support for modifications. Even if there is, there are usually severe limitations with nearly every component along the way. It's a pretty big deal to be able to buy a car that doesn't require replacing the trans, rear end, etc, along with massive headwork, just to get decent FI numbers.

Ya rly!


With a lot of help from people that know what they are doing, and a whole lot of money, sure. It's a lot more economical to make something that comes well-suited to modification fast though.

If you have to modify the car to make it the way you want, chances are that you bought the wrong car to begin with

They don't make any cars that have the features I look for in a car.

I will have to disagree with you on that. By that logic, anyone who modifies their car bought the wrong one. Sometimes the car you want is out of your reach, but you can modify the one you have to try to replicate the performance. Example, I want a GT-R, but I bought a Z. I can buy a TT kit for the Z and modify it to make its performance closer to the GT-R and will have spent half as much money as buying an actual GT-R.

Regardless of your mods, chances are that your car will worth the same as a stock 370Z that some old woman is driving. It's fine if you can afford it and want to do it, but I am not sure if majority of the owners buy their cars to mod....

Most car owners never mod or even think about modding their cars. Mods don't add much value too a car. In fact, a lot may actually decrease the value of the car and you're ability to sell it. The point of modding, IMO at least, is not to increase the value of the car but to have more fun with it. No one buys mods to increase the car's value. They do it to make it look nicer or perform better in order to enjoy it more and make themselves happier.

I'll take my Z. I love the muscle of years ago. Now, not so much.

Thank you for echoing my exact sentiments. I am a fan of the retro look... in fact almost bought a new 5.0 GT instead of the Z. But ultimately, came down to "commonality" more than agility. I just didn't want something that would be too common (I see a lot around) or would look mehhh in a few years. The Z was edgy, and sexy... and there are only 2 Z's right now around where I live for the last year.

Actually 12.9 ;) look at bladesofchaos' sig

Well, of course the majority of people don't modify them. Most modded cars don't hold their value well because of this. The vast majority of people want an A-to-B vehicle, which is why the Camry and Corolla sell so well.

Those of us that use the vehicles for competitive driving, whether autocross, track time/racing, or the drag strip, will need to modify the car to meet our needs.


To be fair, that's an uncorrected time. Most of the mags have run times that are quicker than what they post, and the times are corrected downwards based on altitude, temperature, humidity, etc.

:tup:

By corrected down do you mean corrected to a lower or higher time? How do I get the corrected time for my run?

You'd need to know the weather data from that day. I don't know the data for the condition you ran in, but here is an example.

Bowling's ET/MPH Corrector
Input Parameters Are the Following:

* Test ET = 12.87
* Test MPH = 107.5
* Test Temperature = 55
* Test Barometer = 33.00
* Test Humidity = 40%

Computation Results:

* ET corrected to standard is 13.36
* MPH corrected to standard is 103.1

Dragtimes has one that has weather data and corrects the time for you, but they don't have weather data for that day :mad:

I can't seem to find barometer and humidity data. It was on March 12th around 2 pm.

I wouldnt worry about correcting your times, since you ran what you ran. It's just important to know it's not a straight across comparo to mag times, since they correct the times.

I hate corrections, indexes and handicaps.

blades, where did you run at again?


EDIT:

Here are corrections based on the weather in Odenton, MD at 2pm on March 12th, 2011


Input Parameters Are the Following:

* Test ET = 12.99
* Test MPH = 107.5
* Test Temperature = 47
* Test Barometer = 29.90
* Test Humidity = 40%

Computation Results:

* ET corrected to standard is 13.01
* MPH corrected to standard is 106.5


Still a pretty solid time. The trap speed especially is pretty high.



I'm willing to bet at least some of the difference is due to having a base model, since the brakes and such weigh less. It will make a pretty big difference on times. I couldn't break into the 9's with my S until I went back to stock brakes.

The other component is the obvious fact that the autos are bad a$$ in a straight line.