Nissan 370Z Forum
Page 5 of 6 « First 34 5 6
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Nissan 370Z Forum (http://www.the370z.com/)
-   Nissan 370Z General Discussions (http://www.the370z.com/nissan-370z-general-discussions/)
-   -   370Z Sport Package vs Mazdaspeed 3 GT vs S2000 vs Cayman S vs Mazda Rx-8 (http://www.the370z.com/nissan-370z-general-discussions/7488-370z-sport-package-vs-mazdaspeed-3-gt-vs-s2000-vs-cayman-s-vs-mazda-rx-8-a.html)

Endgame 11-19-2009 02:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXSpeedDemon (Post 246334)
Not to beat a dead horse but as a current owner of both a 370Z and a MazdaSpeed Protege I feel I can add some objective input on this. Check out my album for pics and mod list of my MSP. I realize it's a bit different than a Mazdaspeed 3, but it's very similar in performance, handling and practicality.

--- Performance ---
These types of cars are two different beasts. I like to describe my MSP as a mosquito. INCREDIBLY quick, darty, tossible and fun to drive. Steering feedback makes you feel SOOOOO connected to this car (mazda really has this nailed) and you know exactly where you are in relation to it's limits. It really does "feel" fast, even if you're only going 20mph. And it handles like a dream - you would never believe it's a FWD car.

Fully modified my MSP is as fast on the highway as my stock 370. That however is beyond the reasonable limit of the stock block. I had everything you could do to this car without building the motor and for straight line speed got it as fast as my 370 starts at. Most people blew their motors running this kind of boost. Mine held tight for 5+ years (great tune) then popped when my wastegate actuator broke and I spiked at 20psi :(

My 370Z on the other hand is best described as a missile. When you want to go, IT GOES! And it cruises through the turns nice and smooth. It definitely out handles my MSP - I can take familiar turns at about 5-10mph faster in my Z but I can't really tell how close to the limit I'm at. I will admit this is my first high powered RWD car so I'm no expert at all & it's quite possible I'm not even close to the limit in these turns.... It's just the car is not as confidence inspiring cause I just don't feel as connected to it. I'm sure with more experience I'll get there. 6 years in the Mazda vs 4 months in the Z can't really give the same level of knowledge.

Thus I'm modifying the suspension on the Z first. Hoping to get it up to par before I start building the power level. And for power potential the Z is gonna have so much in the next 1-3 years the options will be virtually limitless. One of the primary reasons I chose this car over a BMW 335.

In short - my MSP is more fun to drive, but my Z is a better performer in all categories. The MSP is a really "sporty" car, while the Z is really a sports car.

--- Styling ---
Hands down the Z wins. No question. I love my MSP, love how unique it is (I know the orange pearl paint isn't for everyone) but really this point doesn't even need to be discussed. The MSP was a great choice when I was in my mid 20s, and I've seen white ones and love them, but still not even close. The MSP looks good, the Z is just plain sexy!

Both interiors are equal IMO, but I am VERY anal about my cars and my MSP with 100K+ miles on it still looks brand new. Took a coworker out for lunch today and they made that exact comment. Plus the MSP has more custom touches the stock 370 doesn't have yet.

---Practicality---
Mazda wins hands down. If I only had 1 car I don't think I could live with my Z. No practical cargo room, no room for the dog... plus it's just too pretty to carry anything other than my GF in ;)

So yeah, they are both great cars, but each in their own respect. I can agree with a lot of the original poster's points and if I could only have one car it's highly doubtful it would be a Z.

Thus, I feel incredibly lucky to have the privilege of being able to drive both :)
Great post. :tup:

I have allways been a MSP fan.... was looking for a clean one when I got my RX8...

wishihadnav 11-19-2009 02:29 PM
well i use to own an rx-8 and imo its handles bettr than my nismo370..much less power but fun to drive nevertheless.

wishihadnav 11-19-2009 02:31 PM
oh btw id take the cayman S outta the bunch if i had the dough..lol.

Pushing_Tin 11-19-2009 05:51 PM
torque steer FTL.

Sand123 11-19-2009 05:53 PM
Quote:
In any event this is an open forum people are here to speak their mind even the ones that disagree
Absolutely. When did it become unacceptable to have a healthy debate about cars? Is this a car forum for the 370Z, or is it the Temple of Z and God save anyone who writes anything that might offend the gatekeepers.

Robert_Nash 11-19-2009 06:01 PM
Try going to CamaroZ28.com or some of the other GM related forums and start putting down their cars and see what happens.

Even in their topics that are supposed to be about the car industry in general they don't tolerate much dissent. :rofl2:

Pushing_Tin 11-19-2009 06:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sand123 (Post 287503)
Absolutely. When did it become unacceptable to have a healthy debate about cars? Is this a car forum for the 370Z, or is it the Temple of Z and God save anyone who writes anything that might offend the gatekeepers.
So you're telling me if I come over and troll the Mazda message board with posts about how the Z is superior everybody will be calm, welcoming, and engaging...? :gtfo2:

Mazdas are fine cars, and if I wanted to have the steering wheel jerked in my hands every day I would own one.

Pushing_Tin 11-19-2009 06:34 PM
And for the RX8 if it had an engine that didn't get piss poor mileage and burn oil like a furnace I'd own of those too.

wishihadnav 11-19-2009 06:45 PM
^yeah the renesis 13b did get poor gas mileage...didnt burn too much oil tho as compared to the older ones..all n all its not a bad car for the money...rear seats to..lolz.

Zsteve 11-19-2009 07:08 PM
I think a better comparison for the mazdaspeed3 would be with other 4 cyl turbo cars in which it would get blown away. I know the Audi TTS is a 2.0T 4 cyl FWD K04 turbo that does 0 to 60 in 4.9 secs compared to 5.5 for the mazda which has a 2.5 liter 4 cyl turbo. So it doesnt even beat its own type of cars.

wishihadnav 11-19-2009 07:11 PM
^i agree..a better comparision would be a 4cly forced induction fwd car..perhaps a neon srt4?

Zsteve 11-19-2009 07:13 PM
besides we all know chipping a turbo car will net you tons more power than a NA car so its not a good comparo. Put even a single turbo on the Z and away she goes.

370Z_Fan 11-19-2009 07:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wishihadnav (Post 287196)
oh btw id take the cayman S outta the bunch if i had the dough..lol.
For the price of the Cayman S I'd get a GT-R.

wishihadnav 11-19-2009 07:25 PM
^^for the price of a GTR i'd buy 4 houses in Michigan..lolz..

theDreamer 11-19-2009 07:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wishihadnav (Post 287612)
^^for the price of a GTR i'd buy 4 houses in Michigan..lolz..
You can only get 3 for the price of a GT-R.

wishihadnav 11-19-2009 07:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by theDreamer (Post 287615)
You can only get 3 for the price of a GT-R.
lol..i stand corrected:tup:

Sand123 11-19-2009 07:34 PM
Quote:
I think a better comparison for the mazdaspeed3 would be with other 4 cyl turbo cars in which it would get blown away. I know the Audi TTS is a 2.0T 4 cyl FWD K04 turbo that does 0 to 60 in 4.9 secs compared to 5.5 for the mazda which has a 2.5 liter 4 cyl turbo. So it doesnt even beat its own type of cars.
Good idea there. But you should have checked your facts first.

Quote:
Audi TTS is a 2.0T 4 cyl FWD K04 turbo that does 0 to 60 in 4.9 secs
The 2009 TTS does 0-60 in 5.6 seconds. And that's with the help of AWD (not FWD). All of the Audi S line cars are AWD. It also weighs 200 lbs more than the Mazdaspeed3, and has 22 less ft-lbs of torque. The Mazdaspeed3 is 200 lbs lighter, has more power, still clocks 0-60 faster despite being FWD, and blows the TTS away beyond 60 mph. Not to mention the fact that the Audi costs around $48,000 while the Mazda costs $25,000.

This comes from Car and Driver and Autoweek.

theDreamer 11-19-2009 07:41 PM
Audi of America > 2010 Audi TTS Coupe > TTS Coupe News and Reviews

• 0-60 mpg: 4.9 seconds
• Top speed: 155 mph
• Shift time: .2 seconds

Audi weight - 3241
Mazdaspeed 3 weight - 3221

Zsteve 11-19-2009 08:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sand123 (Post 287625)
Good idea there. But you should have checked your facts first.



The 2009 TTS does 0-60 in 5.6 seconds. And that's with the help of AWD (not FWD). All of the Audi S line cars are AWD. It also weighs 200 lbs more than the Mazdaspeed3, and has 22 less ft-lbs of torque. The Mazdaspeed3 is 200 lbs lighter, has more power, still clocks 0-60 faster despite being FWD, and blows the TTS away beyond 60 mph. Not to mention the fact that the Audi costs around $48,000 while the Mazda costs $25,000.

This comes from Car and Driver and Autoweek.
Your right about the AWD, but wrong about the times and $$$$ wasnt part of my comparo. With that extra $$$ you get a SH!T load of extras with the Audi that mazda doesnt even think about. And I doubt the mazda will be faster beyond 60 with only .5 liters more. Also only $46K for the TTS but still more than I could afford.

Zsteve 11-19-2009 08:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by theDreamer (Post 287632)
Audi of America > 2010 Audi TTS Coupe > TTS Coupe News and Reviews

• 0-60 mpg: 4.9 seconds
• Top speed: 155 mph
• Shift time: .2 seconds

Audi weight - 3241
Mazdaspeed 3 weight - 3221
just the facts please.:tup: gotta love that DSG, its the bomb, wish the Z 7AT had it or the same as the GT-R.

theDreamer 11-19-2009 08:14 PM
The new Audi TTS is a good competitor to the Z though, not sure I am still on board with the styling of it but it is a solid performer. I really hope that euro model (not sure of its name) makes it to the US, it is a 5 cylinder Audi TT or something.

Zsteve 11-19-2009 08:18 PM
That would be the TTRS and its a speed demon. I think I would take that over the GT-R but dont think its coming here atleast not for awhile. Its 0 60 is 3.8 secs. But Im waiting for a good SC for the Z to come out and then the Z will fly like crazy.

Sand123 11-19-2009 09:23 PM
Quote:
With that extra $$$ you get a SH!T load of extras with the Audi that mazda doesnt even think about. And I doubt the mazda will be faster beyond 60 with only .5 liters more
For twice the price I would certainly hope it came with a bunch of extras!!

I was referring to the 2009 TTS earlier when I said 0-60 in 5.6s. I was comparing the 2009 Audi to the 2009 Mazda. The 2010 Mazdaspeed3 is heavier and slower than the outgoing model, and the new Audi appears to be faster than the outgoing Audi. I looked up the specs on the 2010 TTS , and yes, it hits 60 mph in 4.9 sec with its quattro AWD. But to say it's faster beyond 60 mph is nonsense. It has the same hp than the Mazdaspeed3, a lot less torque, and the extra drivetrain losses of AWD, which makes it slower from anything but a dig.

marcelo929 11-19-2009 09:50 PM
2009 and 2010 TT-S models didn't have any engine changes made so they are both just as fast hitting the 0-60 in about 4.8-4.9 range. The one thing that could've played a role in the times you looked up was a transmission update that was needed. My friend has a 2009 TT-S and trust me that thing holds it's own across the whole powerband. I've driven it and it is in no way slow after 60 mph. MS3 is not as fast as TT-S, period.

Edit: I'm pretty sure your 5.6 time is of the convertible TT-S not coupe..

Sand123 11-19-2009 10:15 PM
Quote:
MS3 is not as fast as TT-S, period.
I'm certainly not one to critique an honest opinion. But is there a lack of knowledge of basic physics here, or what is going on? Please explain to me how a car that is heavier and is putting less power to the ground is faster than a lighter car putting down more power?

Quote:
I've driven it and it is in no way slow after 60 mph
I never said it was slow beyond 60 mph. I just said slowER than a lighter car with more wheel hp and torque. And yes, the drivetrain losses from an AWD car are higher than a FWD or RWD car.

marcelo929 11-19-2009 10:27 PM
alot of stuff goes into consideration not just weight and power. aerodynamic drag, suspension, tires, and other factors come into play also when it comes to straight line performance. Yes I am aware that AWD drivetrain losses may be higher but that doesn't mean the drivetrain in the MS3 is on par performance-wise with the one in the TT-S. I myself have an altima coupe with the V6 and I've raced him and he blows my car out of the water at any speed. Sure my car is around 100 lbs heavier than the TT-S but I believe the MS3 would be a more suitable competitor to my Altima than the TT-S

Sand123 11-19-2009 10:46 PM
Quote:
alot of stuff goes into consideration not just weight and power. aerodynamic drag, suspension, tires, and other factors come into play
Audi TT-S Drag coefficient: .31
Mazdaspeed3 Drag coefficient: .32
Suspension, though not much of a factor, is already a variable in dyno testing. The Speed3 puts down more power than a stock TT-S.
Tires? The TTS comes with better tires than a Mazda. Part of the price tag. Mazda gets shitty tires.
Other factors? Please elaborate.

Quote:
Sure my car is around 100 lbs heavier than the TT-S but I believe the MS3 would be a more suitable competitor to my Altima than the TT-S
The last time I checked the 3.5 Altima has a 15 sec. quarter mile time compared to 14 flat for the Speed3.

marcelo929 11-19-2009 11:18 PM
I personally have run a 14.5 with 98 F weather and in other forums people have run 14.1 completely stock. Yes I agree the MS3 is faster than the Altima I never questioned that part. My point is that the MS3 and Altima would be more evenly matched. I insist that tires alone can play a vital role in dig races along with the suspension. And after 60 mph, while I haven't been in a MS3 or driven one, I bed to differ that the MS3 would be substantially faster if not the TT-S faster.. While I know people really dont like to go by magazine articles for saying which car is faster I have to say that all the numbers I have read are too big of a margin to not believe them. Seeing the numbers again I can see where the MS3 is certainly faster from 100-155 yet, I also see a reasonable margin for the TT-S to be faster from say 0-110 and anything in between.

Car and Driver numbers:

Audi TTS
Zero to 60 mph: 4.8 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 12.4 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 32.7 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 6.0 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.5 sec @ 104 mph

MS3
Zero to 60 mph: 5.8
Zero to 100 mph: 14.8
Zero to 130: N/A

Zsteve 11-20-2009 06:16 AM
The dsg makes it faster too with shorter shift times. And german know how.

Zsteve 11-20-2009 07:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sand123 (Post 287896)
I'm certainly not one to critique an honest opinion. But is there a lack of knowledge of basic physics here, or what is going on? Please explain to me how a car that is heavier and is putting less power to the ground is faster than a lighter car putting down more power?



I never said it was slow beyond 60 mph. I just said slowER than a lighter car with more wheel hp and torque. And yes, the drivetrain losses from an AWD car are higher than a FWD or RWD car.

Audi is quattro actually which means AWD only when it needs it then its FWD. Engine compression ratio can be a factor too. Launch control with AWD is a factor too. Funny you threw the magazine facts out and now that someone trumped your mag with another mag you want to play physics now. My chipped 2.0T K03 turbo (smaller than K04) FWD (not quattro) TT (not TTS) did 0 60 in 5.5 secs on the street.

370Zsteve 11-20-2009 07:35 AM
What is an Audi doing in this thread? :icon14:

areyouin729 11-20-2009 07:48 AM
wow I just read this trash

I'd rather drive a Prius than a souped up Cobalt

CrownR426 11-20-2009 08:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 370Zsteve (Post 288336)
What is an Audi doing in this thread? :icon14:
Exactly. :tup:

Quote:
Originally Posted by areyouin729 (Post 288353)
wow I just read this trash

I'd rather drive a Prius than a souped up Cobalt
I worked on couple Prius'!
They start automatically its crazy and they're possibly the best car to drive for drive bys. SO quiet!

Zsteve 11-20-2009 10:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownR426 (Post 288382)
Exactly. :tup:



I worked on couple Prius'!
They start automatically its crazy and they're possibly the best car to drive for drive bys. SO quiet!
A prius drive by would be halarious , sad but halarious. I could just picture a bunch of thugs shooting out of a prius saying "atleast were going green"

Sand123 11-20-2009 05:45 PM
Quote:
Audi TTS
Zero to 60 mph: 4.8 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 12.4 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 32.7 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 6.0 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.5 sec @ 104 mph

MS3
Zero to 60 mph: 5.8
Zero to 100 mph: 14.8
Zero to 130: N/A
370Z
0-60 4.7
1/4 13.3 at 105 mph

So are you telling me that the Audi TT-S is as fast as the 370Z then despite having a 70 hp disadvantage and the same weight? AWD cars are always going to be fast from a standstill acceleration test. It's the roll-on acceleration that gets them. I also see you managed to find the slowest numbers for the Mazda. Below are figures for the Mazda from Road and Track with links.

Road and Track:
RoadandTrack.com -- Long Term Road Tests - Long-term 2007 Mazdaspeed3 Modified! (11/2008)

MS3
0-60 5.7 sec
0-100 13.8 sec
0-120 20 sec
1/4 14.1 sec at 101mph

MS3 with intake alone (Road and Track's car)
0-60 5.5
0-100 13.1
1/4 13.9 at 103mph

The only time the Audi is going to be faster than the MS3 is from a standstill--that's the benefit of AWD. The Audi practically ties the 370Z from a stop to 100 mph as well but the Z is obviously the faster car.

Zsteve 11-20-2009 06:00 PM
ho hum go find a TTS and race him

marcelo929 11-20-2009 09:38 PM
Road and Track times on the TT-S also blow the MS3 out of the water

http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d..._datapanel.pdf

now you changed the whole TT-S vs MS3 to TT-S vs 370Z lol. I guess i'll just go ahead and agree to disagree. Only a real race would convince me otherwise. Good Day
:tiphat:

Sand123 11-20-2009 10:41 PM
Nothing wrong with disagreeing.

My point in comparing the Z to the TT-S was to show that the Audi's performance specs are inflated b/c of its huge traction advantage. The Z is a much faster car but appears about the same for 0-60 and 0-100, etc. Exact same reason why the Mazdaspeed6 (AWD), which is 500 lbs heavier than the speed3 and has the same engine, is faster in the 1/4 mile. Getting onto the highway though is a different story.

Zsteve 11-21-2009 07:03 AM
Dude! Your car doesnt even beat the Solstice or the Sky and they are both the same setup as yours. Looks like others did more with their K04 turbo than Mazda did, sorry.

j.arnaldo 11-21-2009 07:59 AM
It's a matter of tastes & budget. The Z is a great bang for the buck 'cause it's a well-balanced Sports car (reliability, performance & price). Porsche seems to be the pick of most "experts"; you know, the guys who test cars for automotive magazines. So, don't worry, be happy! Are YOU satisfied with your beaZts?! Don't worry 'bout others' opinions regarding monZters! Just enjoy them--at least, I'm enjoying my '04.5 Touring Coupe to the max'!


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:41 PM.
Page 5 of 6 « First 34 5 6
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2