I never thought Nissan could sustain both segments to begin with. Only time will tell.

O no some Texas trash from a car forum thinks he knows me and my life.. Get your jimmies rustled more fanboy.. Why don't you go report me now lol!

:icon18:

Hit a little close to home there? :rofl2:

We know you're mentally ill. You've admitted that. I blame genetics. You had no chance. It's not your fault.

Gah. He's back?

When's that damn lease up?

He said he's got another year in it. I'm not sure why that means he's here for another year, but those of us with the correct number of chromosomes will never understand the actions of those who happened to get an extra one. :rofl2:

no seriously, fanboy or not (because i'm not a fanboy of this car either), why are you even here? quit bitching and go do something more constructive. like...i dunno, trade your car in.

Ok I'm done bitching bye.

Maybe you'll be a man of your word like the last several times you pulled the "You guys are mean. I'm leaving for good" card.

Nissan said that in the future they will have 4 sport cars in the line up. so that means IDx, Z, Bladerunner, GT-R.

:iagree: also andy palmer has said time and time again that they will never get rid of the Z as it is a form of brand recognition for them

hey junglez! go home fgt.....you're drunk.

:gtfo2:

Depending on when the Z35 is released, I more than likely won't be in a position to purchase it as I just got my 370Z not even a year ago. With that said, I'm actually more excited to see the IDx and what it's capable of.

:bowrofl::bowrofl::bowrofl:

I'm of mixed minds in regards to this info. A lot of the Asian companies seem to be dropping their 6 cylinders in favor of turbo 4s, which I don't mind as long as they are making comparable power. To go to a turbo 4 and trade better fuel economy for less power to me would be a serious mistake. If they can keep it in the mid 300s hp wise, I'd be ok with it.

I do also understand the V6 guys though. Why drop a turbo on a 4 to replace a N/A V6, when you could look into dropping a turbo on the V6. The old adage, there is no replacement for displacement, is still as true today as it was back in the era of muscle cars. It just comes with a lower MPG (which I honestly feel is the real reason for the turbo 4 engines, they are trying to meet the new MPG requirements, while not losing the power.

And in regards to Mercedes's partnership with Nissan. I would be more enthusiastic about it if not for having watched how Mercedes partnership with Chrysler worked out. All that time spent on a company that they had no intention of helping out in the first place. They used them for their parts suppliers and for their truck tech., abused them with a large number of shitty vehicles that were basically Merc throwbacks, and then dumped them when they got everything they needed. I would hate to see anything like that happen to Nissan just to stroke the ego of the execs at Mercedes.

Under Carlos Ghosn, Nissan's $6.1 billion loss turned into a $2.7 billion profit in one year. I'm pretty allow Nissan to sahre Chrysler's fate.

The entire automotive industry is moving from high-displacement/high-cylinder count engines to FI platforms. It's not confined to one market.

The advantages are obvious- comparable power, lower weight, higher gas mileage and comparable costs. It's a no-brainer.

If you’ve been keeping up with progress in the automobile industry, you will note that we are in another protracted transition period that is being heavily influenced by developing technologies along with the need to create cars that are more fuel efficient and earth gentle. With lots of great looking designs integrating user-friendly technologies and small displacement engines while keeping the planet green, all excellent goals to meet the needs of the masses. Let me repeat, the MASSES. However, Nissan should really think hard about their next steps in the development of the Z. If they shrink it and place a smaller displacement engine (even with higher HP & TQ) to meet these current but transitional trends, it can hurt the mark. And playing with the integrity of the design may shift it from icon to commodity. Nissan should take a lesson from the pages of the 911, Land Rover and Corvette, which have their own criticisms in driving style, reliability, quality, but they remain enduring iconic designs that have a strong following, like the Z. With the current design of the Z, it can continue to fall in the same category as the aforementioned names. Just tweak the current design.
Nissan, think long-term. Don’t shrink or radicalize the design it to make it competitive with cars that are not its competition, up or down the scale. If Land Rover just lopped 800 pounds off their current Range Rover by using lighter metals, can’t you reduce a couple of hundred pounds with the Z? Don’t mess with the engine displacement. We Americans like big displacement engines, which in today’s world includes 3.7L V-6’s. Keep the major design elements, increase the displacement, update the interior a bit, and keep the manual transmission.
Please note that this is my singular and Z biased opinion.

Yes, and "earth gentle" unfortunately ends up being marketing speak for folks who don't understand that their environmental impact may just be delayed (disposing of huge batteries) or distant (mining rare earth metals in China, coal generated electricity). At least this transition period as you've aptly put it comes with fairly high output and efficient engines, unlike the response in the '70s to just choke every engine back to ridiculously low output for MPG's sake, even in sports cars.

I don't know enough about CAFE regulations, but it seems as if there should be an exemption for low-sales volume models. It's not as if the current Z brings the Nissan lineup's average down by much as it is, anyway.

I do think that there will be a backlash to some of the tiny turbo'ed engines replacing V6s and larger I4s. It's easy to be fooled by HP and torque measurements, and it seems automakers are also finding ways to game the EPA's mpg test cycles. Many of these new tiny engines are going to return low MPGs if driven hard and may not have the longevity of the more basic engines they're replacing.

Ding ding ding! We have a winner! Know how many times I had to explain to a hybrid driver how my driving a 20 year old Mustang was more environmentally sound than their decision to scrap a perfectly good car and buy a new Prius or whatever? People don't think about the actual impact of their decisions; it's all just marketing and the fact that they want to look cool to their yuppy friends at Starbucks.:rolleyes:

Herd mentality, but that's okay as it keeps order in society up and down the intellectual scale. We should consider writing a letter to Nissan from its loyal "adult" supporters. Corvette people do it, 911 people do it. Simple question Icon or commodity?

The problem is, of that list, I think Chevy is the most aware of their customer's desires and most likely to act in a manner they feel honors that, at least when it comes to the Corvette.

Porsche plays their customer base like a fiddle with ridiculous pricing and lousy "German engineering" choices (plastic coolant parts, anyone?). And hey, you guys are clamoring for a fixed roof Boxster? We'll call it the Cayman AND charge you more for it!

I actually like the idea of an owner's letter to Nissan, although it's likely too late and would probably fall on deaf ears. Maybe I'm wrong, but it feels like Nissan really isn't interested in what we think, and I think part of that may be a cultural difference.

The Corvette has been an American icon for 60 years with some ups and downs, but mostly improvements along the way. The Z, while historically significant, has always been an import on our shores; only recently was it at least partially designed with domestic input. And as relatively poor as it sells, I don't know if Nissan corporate cares what we owners want because they apparently want to reach a different demographic.

I also hear how Nissan sees the Z as an important icon to maintain, but with absolutely zero advertising, the public hardly knows it exists. I realize it's hard to deploy capital on advertising a niche car, but maybe they would see a return with slightly increased sales?

I don't mean to be insensitive, but Japanese companies are a proud and stubborn lot, especially because they've mostly been very successful over the last 25 years in the US. Look at the public's reaction to the horrendous Acura beak - and yet they're still pushing that BS on new models. I think if they perceive that the public doesn't like something, that the public is wrong and they just need to be convinced to think differently.