Originally Posted by 4r3s (Post 1926404)

The wheel is pretty old tech. does that mean all cars are running on old technology then?

Originally Posted by JungleZ (Post 1925253)

I had a 2000 Prelude that was pretty fast for FWD. I only had intake,header,exhaust + good driver = faster than 350Z,s2000,g35. Not as fast as STI or EVO but that prelude h22 in an accord can do damage.

Originally Posted by robones (Post 1926258)

I hope you are being sarcastic because with your list of mods, there is no way in hell your little prelude is faster than any of the cars you mentioned. :icon18:

Originally Posted by nmjaxx9 (Post 1925241)

:bowrofl: isnt that right, but I see it as they are car guys like us to I guess, so I cut em slack. :rofl2:

Originally Posted by luigi90210 (Post 1926476)

i call BS on the s2k
maybe the 350z and g35 if they had the old DE engine but if it had the VR engine, the 350z would smoke you 5 times over


maybe the 350z with the DE engine but that really isnt an accomplishment, the 3.5 altima and maxima would smoke a DE 350z

Originally Posted by captain1 (Post 1924219)

Got some free time at work and did some browse on car reviews at Edmunds. I was surprised by some 0-60 results. The cunky X3 can do so in 5.8 secs and 2013 Accord = 6.1 secs.

Our Z is roughly at 5.x secs (roadster / coupe / auto manual all different). Z is a true sport car, but it's < 1 sec quicker than X3 and Accord.

Is the current Z getting old?

Originally Posted by JungleZ (Post 1926491)

s2000 iS lacking torque stock. If any of those cars were modified theres no chance for my "little Prelude" but believe it or not my $1000 smsp header made that H22A engine very nice and i wasnt even tuned.

and yes I'm talking about the older DE engines.

Originally Posted by OMGiGOTaZ (Post 1926497)

What I find odd is that when I combed through 0-60 times before purchasing the Z, I was also looking at the camaro SS and Genesis coupe, but nothing out there really decimates the Z, it's very competitive and if you buy right and Grab a Stillen Kit :gtfo2: :excited:

Originally Posted by nmjaxx9 (Post 1924539)

Unless you step on the pedal, I realized grannying it on the highway vs a couple pulls on the highway and im down like 3-4 dots. :icon17:

Originally Posted by DarkJak (Post 1924837)

The engine is based on a pretty old platform. No DI, uses more fuel that most V6's now, and doesn't really have any tricks up it's sleeve, like start-stop and cylinder deactivation. However, it does have a 7.5k redline, which is still on the high side of things, and makes 90 hp/l, which is pretty good for a higher displacement engine.

The manual has SRM, which is definitely new tech.
The auto isn't a dual clutch, but is snappy and fun with the paddles with 7 gears.

Carbon composite driveshaft is more advanced than most. Wheels are lighter than most. Gripper than cars in its price range too, even with conventional springs and shocks.

So the Z is more conventional than the new cars coming out, but everything that I'd say is old, I'd also label as being very refined for the tech.

Originally Posted by mhcoss (Post 1927206)

Yea, Its amazing how fast my fuel gauge drops when I start opening up the throttle haha! The way you drive this car makes a huge difference!

Originally Posted by G37sHKS (Post 1927191)

So VVEL is considered as old school technology now?

Originally Posted by nmjaxx9 (Post 1928457)

Hence you have to be careful about how much fun you have. Unless you have the income to back it up. :D

Originally Posted by DarkJak (Post 1924837)

The engine is based on a pretty old platform. No DI, uses more fuel that most V6's now, and doesn't really have any tricks up it's sleeve, like start-stop and cylinder deactivation. However, it does have a 7.5k redline, which is still on the high side of things, and makes 90 hp/l, which is pretty good for a higher displacement engine.

The manual has SRM, which is definitely new tech.
The auto isn't a dual clutch, but is snappy and fun with the paddles with 7 gears.

Carbon composite driveshaft is more advanced than most. Wheels are lighter than most. Gripper than cars in its price range too, even with conventional springs and shocks.

So the Z is more conventional than the new cars coming out, but everything that I'd say is old, I'd also label as being very refined for the tech.

Originally Posted by nmjaxx9 (Post 1926509)

X2 was looking at the camaro as well but the interior of it made me run away from it really fast. :rofl2:

Originally Posted by UNKNOWN_370 (Post 1929686)

I was between the Z, G, gencoupe, & camaro. At first choice, the G won. After 13 months in a G37s... I bought a Z. I test drove the others extensively. At the time, I realized the others couldn't deliver on the same performance level. The camaro SS torque though is the best in the affordable sport segment. Torque in the camaro even trumps the stang. I found true fun factor rivals in the Evo and 135,but the best overall value in the Z.

Originally Posted by jcosta79 (Post 1928474)

Variable valve timing, lift, and all it's variations, is not new technology by any stretch of the imagination. If the next gen Z car does not have direct injection, it will definitely be considered old technology.

Originally Posted by jza (Post 1932181)

Here's an article that talks about possible reasons not to use DI (read: cost). Although considering the price of the Z, they probably should be using it by now :)

Originally Posted by alcheng (Post 1932368)

Of cos the 370z is "=" old technology.....

It has a 4-stroke gasoline engine, which has been exist for 80+ years.

Change direction through a steering column.... a day 1 technology since automobile is invented.

Use wheels/tires to transfer the kinetic energy into motion... this is also since day 1...

Use friction to stop the vehicle..... that's old school method too....

Change gear manually, well, we choose to do that.....

Look.. they even have roadster at that time:

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/000...ll_xlarge.jpeg

so... what's wrong with our Z??? :icon17:

We like our Z, so we drive one regardless.... :tup:

Originally Posted by UNKNOWN_370 (Post 1933453)

l:inoutroflpuke: lol... Luv it!!!

Repped! The thread should be closed on your note. :bowrofl:

Originally Posted by 11Thumper (Post 1933836)

Sure, there are cars out there with more modern tech. No doubt about that. It depends on what you really want. I'm not sure why the OP even brought this up. It's not like Nissan claimed DI for this car and then people found out they were scammed after buying it. Buy the car that fits your own needs/interests/budget. I do think Nissan failed some with allowing their bean counters to be too involved with product development (no oil cooler in '09-'11 models for example) but hey, the majority of drivers don't push the car enough to require it anyway so why make everyone pay for this feature. Allow people to upgrade on their own. The fuel economy could (and should) be better for this car but if you can't afford the gas this isn't the right car anyway.

I own an aircraft that was built in 1951 and the technology (other than electronics) hasn't changed a whole lot in 61 years. Even in modern airplanes I still have to adjust the fuel mixture manually to compenstate for power setting and altitude.

Nothing seems to evolve as quickly as sportbikes when it comes to technology. The '09 I have is totally outdated by the super fast ZX123456 model. Oh well...

Originally Posted by NissanGuy23 (Post 1933863)

I wouldn't say the Z is old in any respect at all, infact its a hell of alot more modern than its American rivals!

Originally Posted by 11Thumper (Post 1933865)

Dude, the Camaro can transform... :happydance:

Originally Posted by Rockhound (Post 1924364)

I would hesitate to classify it as strictly “old technology” – as that carries an unnecessarily negative connotation. I mean, there’s plenty of truly old technology out there that still can achieve impressive performance (think pushrod V8s and live rear axles).

That’s not to say that Nissan couldn’t incorporate some technologies such as direct injection for potential gains, but the Z’s performance is mostly a matter of its power/weight ratio. Same with the examples you mentioned. The new Accord Coupe was tested by Motor Trend to get to 60 MPH in 5.6 seconds, with a 14 sec 1/4mi @ 101.4 MPH.

C & D’s first 370Z instrumented test resulted in a 4.9 second 0-60 and 13.5 sec 1/4mi @ 106 MPH. Weight between the two is very close (as tested in those two tests the Accord Coupe was 3367lb and the Z was 3373lb). Roadholding was of course much better for the Z at 0.97g versus only 0.83g for the purposely softer Accord.

I guess what I’m getting at is that shaving considerable time off of your acceleration figures once you’re in the sub-5 second range is a matter of diminishing returns. Look at the Nismo, for instance, with an additional 18hp and 6lb-ft and yet I think the normal 7AT Z still turns in the best 0-60 times.

The bottom line is that performance cars have less room to improve than normal sedans and crossovers, so this isn’t just a conversation for the Z. Heck, base Corvettes (430hp 6.2L V8) achieve a 4.5sec 0-60 - just 1.1 second faster than an Accord Coupe.