Motor Trend 8/29/12 2012 370 Review

Montez

Here we have a another Lackluster but sorta true review of our beloved Z by M/T.

2012 Nissan 370Z First Drive - Motor Trend


August 29, 2012
By Alex Nishimoto


2012 Nissan 370Z
Click to view Gallery
When we sampled the Nissan 370Z early last year, we said it was a good value for the performance and fun factor it returned. But a lot has changed in the segment since then. The Hyundai Genesis Coupe has been refreshed for 2013, gaining more power and updated styling. The biggest development, though, is the arrival of the rear-drive Toyobaru twins, the Scion FR-S and Subaru BRZ. With lower price tags compared to the Z, do those cars pose a threat to the two-seater's value argument? We ordered up a 2012 Nissan 370Z to find out.

Stepping inside our tester's bare-bones cabin led me to believe it was a base model. Glancing at the spec sheet confirmed the lack of certain options, but revealed it wasn't quite the stripper I thought it was. This particular 2012 Nissan 370Z was equipped with the $3030 sport package, which includes 19-inch forged aluminum alloy wheels wrapped in sticky Bridgestone RE050A rubber, upgraded brakes, a viscous limited-slip differential, and Nissan's SynchroRev Match six-speed manual transmission. All of those features added to the Z's performance credentials, but also bumped the cost up to $37,005 as tested.

2012 Nissan 370Z
Click to view Gallery
The only other options were the $785 rearview mirror-integrated back-up camera display and $125 carpeted floormats. The radio unit looked dated, with basic functions like single-disc CD playback capability and an aux input jack. Modern features such as Bluetooth (and subsequently streaming audio) and satellite radio were nowhere to be found, though they are available through the $1350 Bose audio package. Further contributing to that retro feeling was the interior styling, which hasn't aged as well as the exterior sheetmetal.

2012 Nissan 370Z
Click to view Gallery
Manual seats -- another base model hallmark -- were also present. Finding a comfortable position with the six-way adjustable driver's seat isn't an issue, as long as your legs are short enough to not need a telescoping steering wheel. But the non-height-adjustable four-way passenger seat is decidedly less comfortable for whoever must ride shotgun, as the low-slung seating position means their knees are always bent at an awkward angle. The seats hold you in place well enough, but the seatbacks are on the thin side, and I could feel the headrest posts poking me as I leaned back. In the center console sit three blank buttons where the seat warmer controls would go, if so equipped. While I understand Nissan had to put something there, the nonfunctional plastic buttons are a reminder of the options you didn't spring for, and make you feel like something's missing. Also noticeably absent is the navigation screen, which is replaced by a conspicuous, leather-upholstered cubby. This interior piece looks as though it could hide a nav screen, but flip it open and you're treated to a barely usable storage compartment.



These shortcomings are redeemed somewhat once the Z is given room to gallop. The car's 3.7-liter V-6, which produces 332 hp and 270 lb-ft of torque, provides adequate thrust and makes you look forward to impromptu stoplight romps. While stabbing the throttle may be habit-forming, the sound coming from the engine bay isn't the source of the addiction. As many staffers have noted, the 370Z's VQ engine note isn't all that sporty-sounding from inside the cabin, especially in the higher rpms. Rather than a deep, visceral growl, you're treated to a vacuum-like drone as you work your way through the rev band.

2012 Nissan 370Z
Click to view Gallery
The six-speed manual transmission contributes to the Z's fun quotient. In true sports car fashion, both gearing and throws were short. Though this meant swapping gears happened quickly and often, the transmission didn't like to be hustled, sometimes not accepting a hurried one-two upshift. Because the center console storage bin's release button is directly in your elbow's path, muscling the shifter into gear causes the center console storage bin to open occasionally. The clutch pedal felt stiff even by sports car standards, and seemed to want to spring back out when I got close to the engagement point. This, however, could be attributed to the test car's low miles, and the fact that the pedal hadn't been broken in. The transmission's auto rev-matching feature is a neat trick, and was particularly convenient in stop-and-go traffic. The feature worked fine on twisty canyon roads as well, but my right heel began to miss doing its own throttle blips. Luckily, Nissan gives you the option to turn it on and off at will.


Canyon roads allowed the Z, with its sport package goodies, to shine even brighter. The chassis surrendered little through turns, delivering jet fighter-like Gs while keeping body roll to a minimum. Helping the Z adhere to the road surface like glue were the Potenza RE050A summer tires, easily the sport package's star feature. As expected, turn-in is ultra-sharp and precise, and the responsiveness of the steering system makes you want to crank the wheel all day long.

2012 Nissan 370Z
Click to view Gallery
The car's performance potential was further confirmed at the track, with the Z posting a more than respectable 4.8-second 0-60 mph time, and completing the quarter-mile in 13.4 seconds at 105.6 mph. That's faster than the 2013 Hyundai Genesis Coupe 3.8 we recently tested, which posted a 5.2-second 0-60 and a 13.9-second quarter-mile at 102.2 mph. The Nissan required 106 feet to brake from 60-0 mph, and averaged an impressive 0.99 g in lateral acceleration, beating out the heavier, track pack-equipped 2013 Mustang V-6 Premium's 60-0 stopping performance of 110 feet and a skidpad average of 0.95 g. With its figure-eight result of 25.1 seconds at an average 0.74 g, the Z proved it's still an agile handler.

Though I enjoyed driving the Z, I couldn't help wondering if the market still has a place for it. There's no denying the car's performance chops, but with its basic interior and limited standard features, are you getting your money's worth at more than $30,000? If you want a 2013 model, you'll have to shell out $33,900. That car does receive a face-lift, though, complete with revised front and rear fascias, standard LED daytime running lights, and new wheel designs.


Looking at other rear-drive, V-6-powered two-doors, you find most ring up below the Z's starting price. The 2013 Hyundai Genesis 3.8 R-Spec with six-speed manual starts at $29,625; the six-speed-equipped 2012 Chevy Camaro 2LT starts at $29,330; and the 2013 Ford Mustang V-6 Premium with performance package we recently tested came in at $30,830. If prospective Z buyers cross-shop the four-cylinder rear-drive Subaru BRZ, they'd find many of the same features and a similarly sporty driving experience for thousands less. Granted, you also get less power with the BRZ's 200-hp, 151-lb-ft 2.0-liter flat-four, but as we've experienced with the BRZ, that reduced power doesn't get in the way of having fun.

For the Z's next generation, Nissan should decide if it wants to continue to play in the $30,000-range sporty coupe sandbox, or move upmarket and offer the same performance but more content, possibly putting it in the same company as the BMW Z4 and Audi TT. As it exists now, the Z is fun to drive, but difficult to justify over its lower-priced competitors.

Read more: 2012 Nissan 370Z First Drive - Motor Trend

Spikuh

I think it is a decent assessment. Not really sure how he is getting the center console compartment to open while shifting though.

__________________

The Z monster

It's true tho. They should upgrade the base models to have nicer options come standard.

__________________
window tint - LIGHTNING HAMMER INSTA-CHARGER (600whp proven)

DCNISMO

Yea, that's weird...never happened to me. Maybe he was wearing a watch or something.

BigT

If it had 375hp and 300ft lbs from the factory, nothing else would matter.

MMC Racing

The BRZ comparison is silly. Do people only drive around corners all day? I drive my car to work and I like having torque.

What the story says about the base stereo is spot on. Time has left Nissan way behind here. Even the top end Navi system is slow and lacks features of some of the newest cars out there.

Besides the stereo, I don't fine the interior dated though.

__________________
2014 F150 Raptor, 2014 Mazda 3, 2015 Nissan GT-R

cooltoy

What is different in the 2013 rear? He said it was re-designed. The only thing I am aware off is the fog light.

HKYStormFront

that is correct, i believe he was mistaken/mistyped there. i read this article a little while ago too. seems pretty fair and overall positive for the Z. here's hoping nissan brings in some focus to the car's goals when it gets updated soon

__________________
Patrick // 06 Frontier 6spd Nismosis // Mods: Uprev Tuned @ Z1 Motorsports: 257whp & 292 ft lbs
09 Pontiac G8 GXP // M6 // Sunroof // Tint... For now

DJ-of-E

As a 2013 model, this assessment is pretty spot on if you consider how little "features" was added, yet price went up around 5% - 10% overall. I know the 370z was "a bit" ahead of its time, but competition is catching up A LOT quicker then when the 350z first came out.

__________________

shadoquad

It's another rubbish article.

Could I get a Toyobaru? Sure, but it's slow.
Could I get a Mustang or Camaro? Sure, but they're huge and common.
Could I get a GenCoupe? Sure, but I'd be surprised if it's as well-built.

The Z is still, to me, the best fit in that segment. It is an enthusiast car, has decent power, handles very well, looks great, and is relatively affordable and reliable.

But you won't hear that out of a car rag, because Nissan isn't pumping them full of money for the Z.

DLSTR

The Z IS competing with the Z4 and the TT. Here in Germany the TTRS lost to a 370Z in a video comparison. Simple check of the article shows why the Z cost more than the others they mistakenly compare it to....chassis dynamics. Period.
In fact here in Germany the Z is known as the Japanese 911. The shape, the power etc.
MT has it wrong. Where in any literature is the Z remotely even trying to compete with those priced much less. That's an assumption they have ZERO proof off.
Since a TTRS is equipped with a 5 cyl turbo, base or otherwise the Z stands out with its lack of turbo and more torque, linear V6. Better brakes etc. To get a TTRS with comparable Z power you will pay much more. The article lacks rational analysis of the actual market the Z is in to begin with.

enkei2k

One of the main reasons why I got a base + sport was because IMO I believe that 'sports cars' shouldn't need all the extra luxuries such as heated seats, navi, power seats, blue tooth, etc etc...just adds unwanted weight to the car. I have no interest in any of these things in a sports car. If I wanted all that stuff, I would get a G37.

DLSTR

+1

RandyD

I'm sure i made the right choice...

Jordo!

Actually, based on performance it's priced pretty much spot on. Handles better than the Camaro or Mustang and accelerates better than the Genesis, and is thus a bit more cash.

The BRZ/FR-S is hopelessly outclassed, except perhaps in "fun" (i.e., hype) factor.

The reviewer didn't like the amenities or the engine noise.

Whatever.

If the next version is more tossable and has equal or greater power at a lower weight and similar price point, it's a no-brainer for me on my next car.

__________________
Enjoy it. Destroy it.