Targa / T-Top 370Z

Toast · 12-25-2008, 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AK370Z

I had T-tops in a camaro I previously owned and I hated it! Most annoying feature in a car. I have never taken it off during my whole ownership of the car. so, t-top = scratch.

Targa is something I would consider. They look nice. I have seen Corvettes with targa and I like them.

I do like the LOOK of the convertibles but performance wise they are less rigid and heavier (due to boot). Still they are great weekend cars though. When driving alongside the mountains or rivers, you can't beat the convertible.

Coupe is the winner!

I think the differences between convertibles and coupes are so small you`re never going to feel it unless you`re on a racetrack, in a helmet, pushing the car to its limit and barely sticking to the tarmac. Everybody cites this `rigidity` thing with convertibles only because motoring journalists continually point it out so we all imagine we`re feeling that lack of rigidity, but we`re not because most people never drive that hard. Yes, the 0-60 time is slightly slower because of the extra weight (which was added to `rigidise` it), so in fact its no less rigid at all, but if we`re talking about driving experience, well you feel more speed with no roof, and you can hear your engine better.

Crash · 12-26-2008, 05:18 AM

That depends on the car still. The corvette has a full chassis. There are cars that only have half frames (Like F-Bodies and mustangs).

But more importantly, there's a HUGE difference between convertibles and roadsters: Roadsters were designed to be topless. Their frames are tough from the get-go. Convertibles, however, are usually an afterthought. Hence the extra crap on them to make them more rigid... But that doesn't mean they're as rigid as a coupe.

BTW, I felt the lack of stiffness in my Trans Am which was a T-Top. That frame flexed and twisted like it was NOTHING. Taking turn, or going up and down drive ways was a fantastic reminder how crappy the half frames were. It felt slightly better when the tops were on, but not much. And the car DESPERATELY needed sub-frame connectors which I'd never got around to doing.

You can certainly feel rigidity in a car, convertible vs. coupe. You CAN feel that. Added weight is a mute point, but for racing, convertible isn't the smartest idea (suspension and rigidity wise)

Toast · 12-30-2008, 12:48 AM

Well, look I don`t want to argue with you on your Trans-Am and whether it had any build quality issues - I haven`t driven one so can`t comment. And you`re right it depends upon the car; and right again that once long ago, roadsters were different from convertibles, were different from coupes. But its 2008 now and things are different, and I just want to make the broad point that you should never underestimate the power of suggestion.

Try this experiment: hand someone a glass of wine and ask them what they think of it. Then when they are halfway down the glass hand them the tasting notes that the experts have written - the bit that says it`s got strong fruit tastes, or maybe even figs and is a little over-oaked. Of course people are going to say "Oh yes, I can clearly pick out figs, no problem" because nobody wants to feel foolish or unrefined by having missed it.

Similar with car journalists. Try and find an article on a convertible (or roadster) that doesn`t open up with the old hard-top vs. rigidity thing. And so people imagine they can feel it in all sorts of cars that are built stiffer these days.

Your 0-60 isn`t a moot point by the way - if acceleration is all you want, buy a hard-top (or a faster car, even). For racing, like you (and I) said, that`s when you push a car to its limit - that`s when you`ll feel it. But not when you`re off to WalMart for the shopping.

frost · 12-30-2008, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crash

That depends on the car still. The corvette has a full chassis. There are cars that only have half frames (Like F-Bodies and mustangs).

But more importantly, there's a HUGE difference between convertibles and roadsters: Roadsters were designed to be topless. Their frames are tough from the get-go. Convertibles, however, are usually an afterthought. Hence the extra crap on them to make them more rigid... But that doesn't mean they're as rigid as a coupe.

BTW, I felt the lack of stiffness in my Trans Am which was a T-Top. That frame flexed and twisted like it was NOTHING. Taking turn, or going up and down drive ways was a fantastic reminder how crappy the half frames were. It felt slightly better when the tops were on, but not much. And the car DESPERATELY needed sub-frame connectors which I'd never got around to doing.

You can certainly feel rigidity in a car, convertible vs. coupe. You CAN feel that. Added weight is a mute point, but for racing, convertible isn't the smartest idea (suspension and rigidity wise)

As a former F-bod owner myself, I know the pains of body flex with the T-tops. In fact, body flex was so bad that I remember a couple people on the boards actually twisting the bodies enough for the T's to actually come out of place and fall to the ground. Subframe connectors were my first purchase which helped out a lot.
That being said, it definitely depends on the car, because both my c5 and c6 vette had a "removable" (not allowed to call it a targa because that name is owned by porche) top and felt stiff as hell, even with the top off. Just depends on the money invested into the car by the manufacturer.

Threev8s · 08-11-2010, 12:33 PM

I'd trade up for a retractable glass-top targa similar to what Porsche uses in the 911 if it was reasonably priced. I just don't think Nissan could ever justify the cost to engineer it for the quantity that they would expect to sell.

View Poll Results: Which would you go with?
Targa	117	52.00%
T-Top	43	19.11%
Convertible	3	1.33%
Coupe	62	27.56%
Voters: 225. You may not vote on this poll

12-26-2008, 05:18 AM	#2 (permalink)
Crash A True Z Fanatic Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,853 Drives: 02 Corvette Z06 Rep Power: 589	That depends on the car still. The corvette has a full chassis. There are cars that only have half frames (Like F-Bodies and mustangs). But more importantly, there's a HUGE difference between convertibles and roadsters: Roadsters were designed to be topless. Their frames are tough from the get-go. Convertibles, however, are usually an afterthought. Hence the extra crap on them to make them more rigid... But that doesn't mean they're as rigid as a coupe. BTW, I felt the lack of stiffness in my Trans Am which was a T-Top. That frame flexed and twisted like it was NOTHING. Taking turn, or going up and down drive ways was a fantastic reminder how crappy the half frames were. It felt slightly better when the tops were on, but not much. And the car DESPERATELY needed sub-frame connectors which I'd never got around to doing. You can certainly feel rigidity in a car, convertible vs. coupe. You CAN feel that. Added weight is a mute point, but for racing, convertible isn't the smartest idea (suspension and rigidity wise) __________________ 2002 Corvette Z06 - Totaled 2003 Corvette Z06 50th Anniversary

12-30-2008, 12:48 AM	#3 (permalink)
Toast Base Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: UK Posts: 7 Drives: 06 Nissan 350z NB M6 Rep Power: 16	Well, look I don`t want to argue with you on your Trans-Am and whether it had any build quality issues - I haven`t driven one so can`t comment. And you`re right it depends upon the car; and right again that once long ago, roadsters were different from convertibles, were different from coupes. But its 2008 now and things are different, and I just want to make the broad point that you should never underestimate the power of suggestion. Try this experiment: hand someone a glass of wine and ask them what they think of it. Then when they are halfway down the glass hand them the tasting notes that the experts have written - the bit that says it`s got strong fruit tastes, or maybe even figs and is a little over-oaked. Of course people are going to say "Oh yes, I can clearly pick out figs, no problem" because nobody wants to feel foolish or unrefined by having missed it. Similar with car journalists. Try and find an article on a convertible (or roadster) that doesn`t open up with the old hard-top vs. rigidity thing. And so people imagine they can feel it in all sorts of cars that are built stiffer these days. Your 0-60 isn`t a moot point by the way - if acceleration is all you want, buy a hard-top (or a faster car, even). For racing, like you (and I) said, that`s when you push a car to its limit - that`s when you`ll feel it. But not when you`re off to WalMart for the shopping.

08-11-2010, 12:33 PM	#5 (permalink)
Threev8s Base Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Wayne, PA/Ventnor, NJ Posts: 72 Drives: 09 MB 6MT,03 V8 4Run Rep Power: 15	I'd trade up for a retractable glass-top targa similar to what Porsche uses in the 911 if it was reasonably priced. I just don't think Nissan could ever justify the cost to engineer it for the quantity that they would expect to sell.