The Mini's not even on the list, that's what I had before my Z. I think it's just the Z is in it's final run before a redesign and people are bored with it. Newer cars have more technology like lane departure, blind spot, back up camera, eco/sport modes, turbo, blue tooth, Pandora, Facebook and more stuff as standard equipment.

The second this article talked about the Z going
V8. I called garbage on this article...
why don't muscle cars go turbo v6 for better Fuel economy and equal power of the v8? Easy answer... V8 heritage...
So why the FUKK is this writer asking Nissan to leave Japanese heritage of the 6 configuration. Inline, v or turbo 6 are options. V8's in a Z is out

Secondly, the whole appeal of the Z is to be a low slung two seat sport coupe, that's a direct competition to boxster, Cayman, corvette, not mustang.

The Z us a niche car. Yes, 7500 units a year is very low. But 80,000 units should not be the Z goal. 15,000-20,000 units max annually is the proper goal for this type of niche vehicle. So full mustang stats when talking about a Z.

The only issue that's valid is the Z is underpowered for the price. So either bring the Z to a $28,000msrp or add turbos n start it at $34,000.

The FRS/BRZ IS UNDERPOWERED & OVERPRICED as well. So I laugh at there comparo. First n second year sales will always be high due to fanboy purchases. Every year after that is average Joe consumers with a very low percentage of fanboys. The twins should start at $23k n top out at $27k...

The Z is outdated in power... Yes. But at least it didn't enter that way. Remember the stanh wasn't supposed to see the 5.0 till 2013, because the Z was killing mustangs in 09, running with the brand new SS, and beating the challenger r/t in a straight line.
The muscle cars are volume sellers and have more room for flexibility. The made annual changes that made it faster than the Z.
Nissan messed up when, the made stupid DRL n fascia upgrades instead of smoothing out VVEL, increasing gear ratios, SUSPENSION TUNE and loudening up the exhaust. The 2015 NISMO is what the regular Z should have been in 2013 and the NISMO should be 400 HP. But not because it's not as good as a stang. It's because it should have been progressive. But again. Sales were weak. It was a doubled edged sword for the Z.
Hopefully NISSAN will go FI next gen n problem solved.

They didn't say the Nissan needs a V8, just that a lot of American consumers want one (which seems to be the case...). They did say the next gen needs to have a bit more punch to compete with the more torque cars, which is undoubtedly true.

The 2+2 thing isn't a deal breaker for me personally, but again, I can see where this will be fine for someone pre-family and then not so good after.

I dunno, all in all, I think those three points are all fair.

If they make the Z a 100 lbs lighter, notch up performance a smidge with either a turbo 4 or NA 6, add two faux rear seats. and keep the price in the same ball park, I think it will be a winner.

I remember when people said the z should never have a v6.



And the 5.0 was targeted for 2010 and was late...

http://www.the370z.com/members/7spee...g-2430-jpg.jpg

As most of us know, Nissan/Infiniti also needs to work on reliability.

I'm probably still in the honeymoon phase, but I want to keep the Z as my second car instead of trade it in when I move to another vehicle. It's just so damn pretty.

Late to the party here, but gimme a break - it's Consumer Reports. No self-respecting car enthusiast reads or gives half a sh** about anything CR has to say about cars.

On the other hand, I'm sure there are plenty of [fill-in the blank] who bought a Z for all the wrong reasons, decided it wasn't for them, and who do read and respond to CR surveys.

Perhaps a poll of who here reads CR for what they have to say about cars is in order.

Self disclosure -
Previously owned 240Z, (2) 300ZX 2+2;
Currently own 300ZX-TT & 370Z 40thAE

Totally :iagree:

I love Harry. IDC what CR says. :rolleyes:

Nissan gets slammed in Consumer Reports
 

This article just appeared on CNN related to Nissan's abysmal ratings.

Nissan gets slammed in Consumer Reports - Dec. 14, 2014

The Nissan Sentra ranked last in owner satisfaction among compact cars in Consumer Reports most recent owner satisfaction survey.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney)
Looks like something's wrong at Nissan because, according to a recent Consumer Reports survey, a lot of Nissan owners don't like their vehicles very much.

For that matter, neither do the people who work at Consumer Reports.

In the influential magazine's latest customer satisfaction survey, Nissan finished third from last in the overall brand rankings, just ahead of Mitsubishi and Daimler's (DDAIF) Smart, which sells just one super-tiny car. Added to that, Infiniti, Nissan's luxury brand, tied with Buick as the lowest-ranked luxury brand.

Of 22 Nissan and Infiniti models included in the survey, 14 of them ranked last or second-to-last-in their respective categories. In two categories -- luxury SUVs and pickups -- Nissan (NSANF) and Infiniti products ranked both last and second-to last. This wasn't always the case. Just two years ago, only three Nissan products fared so badly in this survey.

The problems stem from Nissan's most recent round of redesigns, Consumer Reports' car testers say. Starting in 2012, many of the latest generation of Nissan products haven't performed particularly well in the magazine's tests. Now owners are basically seconding what Consumer Reports' testers thought.

"They only wish they'd found out ahead of time," said Jeff Bartlett, an editor with Consumer Reports.

As CNNMoney's car critic, I'd noticed the same troubling trend. Some recent Nissan cars I've driven have seemed sadly cheaper, less refined and less enjoyable than the cars they replaced.

Nissan is addressing the criticisms, Nissan spokesman Dan Passe said. For instance, among other subtle tweaks, they're changing the computer programming that runs the transmissions in order to give the cars are more natural, responsive feel.

"Customer satisfaction is of the utmost importance to Nissan, which is why we encourage consumers to utilize the many third party resources available when researching automotive brands," Passe said in an email. "While we will study Consumer Reports' annual owner-satisfaction survey to look for areas to refine and improve our products, we also take great pride in the many other positive 3rd party assessments of our product lineup."

Nissan performed much better in market research firm J.D. Power and Associates' owner satisfaction survey. In all, seven Nissan models ranked among the top three in their respective vehicle categories in J.D. Power's survey. That's better than Honda or Toyota.

There are big differences between the J.D. Power and Consumer Reports' surveys, though. One is that J.D. Power surveys owners after just 90 days of ownership. People responding to Consumer Reports' surveys have lived with their cars much longer.

"Our respondents owned their vehicle from one to three years," Consumer Reports spokesman Matt Fields said in an email. "The honeymoon period is over."

Consumer Reports is generally considered the most influential publication among car shoppers. Owners of 350,000 cars were surveyed, including 17,500 Nissan products.

Nissan's problems with Consumer Reports readers don't seem to be hitting sales yet. Nissan's market share has actually increased somewhat this year, according to data from industry analysts at LMC Automotive. Meanwhile, Nissan's spending on financial incentives to spur sales has gone down and is now below the industry average, according to data from Edmunds.com. (Nissan still spends more than its Japan-based competitors Honda and Toyota, though.)

Disappointed owners could hurt that sales momentum down the road, though. Consumer Reports' survey asked owners if they'd buy the same vehicle again and a lot of Nissan customers have said, basically, "I'm not so sure."

At least Consumer Reports' car critics say they've been impressed with two of Nissan's most recent new products, the Rogue and Murano crossover SUVs. For the time being, though, Nissan's product line-up is, at best, inconsistent, said Gabriel Shenhar, senior auto test engineer at Consumer Reports.

"For any brand, it's important to have a clear definition," he said. "For Nissan the only thing they're known for now is they're unpredictable."

It could be worse folks. Could be like me who has a '14 Grand Cherokee SRT, is twice as expensive as my Z, and is ranked much lower than Nissan in this survey. It's my first American car. Oh well! I've already been sent 4 recall notices for little things.
Oh, and I love my Z, but I wouldnt get another. It's a stepping-stone sports car.

Agree entirely with the first point. But the FRS/BRZ is simply a blast to drive and costs about as much (if not a little less) as a fully loaded Hyundai Elantra...

Driving the FRS brings nothing but smiles...as soon as you enter a corner and realize how much you can throw it around, the lack of speed factor is instantly forgotten. Just my personal opinion - I was incredibly skeptical of the vehicle before I plopped into the seat and took off...it just feels right. It does have a wonderful simplicity/purity to it.

100% would buy again. It's cheap and easy to make the car faster if that's what you're after. (relative to the cost of upgrading to something like a 911.) Don't like the ride? Coils are cheap too. You get the idea. The one thing that is hardest to change, is the thing Nissan absolutely nailed. The overall look. Nothing even remotely touches it anywhere near the price. Yeah, the Mclaren P1 and some of the Pagani offerings do more for me than the Z, but let's get back to reality.

Even if down the road I want to get into a v10 R8, or a 911 Turbo, no way I would sell the Z. Yeah, it already has over 20k into it since purchase, easily another 20k to go just making it my own. But so would a 2015 5.0 mustang, or a C7 Z06 for that matter. Difference is, when it's all said and done, the Z still looks nicer than both of those.

I get wanting to try something new, start a new project, etc. But (at least for me) that doesn't replace the Z at all, it means you need a bigger garage. So if I had to start all over, you better believe buying the 370 again would be the first step!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

At the end of the day, the problem is that it's apparently not easy to make a FR (lets leave FF's and AWD's out of it for now) sporty car that is attractive, fast, handles and brakes well, and is affordable to what passes for the new middle class (i.e., dubious upward mobility potential at a time when stagnation or even downward mobility is commonplace...).

The FR-S, Z, MX-5, and the latest iteration of the Mustang in particular are all variations on those themes -- yes the Mustang is a "pony car", but the very concept of a pony car is based on Ford (and GM) attempting to fit all three of the aforementioned attributes into one vehicle, even though a pony's emphasis has historically been on muscle over agility.

Quite a few of the "OG" gang sold their Z's and bought Mustangs (at least to the best of my knowledge...), hence my earlier comment a few pages back, while comparisons to the FR-S are rooted in the fact that there are simply very, very few affordable cars (say, under 60K) aimed at being truly "sporty".

In the US, muscle is always a big selling point; in much of the rest of the world, agility tends to be better appreciated (exception: Australia?)

Whether or not anyone sticks with the Z for its next generation will come down to how well Nissan crams the key "sporty" attributes into their car at a manageable price. Otherwise, the power junkies will skew towards muscle, the cone dodgers will look for more lithe cars, and the folks with more money will just buy a more expensive car.

All in all, though, Nissan did a very good job with the Z34, and their (rumored) plans for the Z35 all sound pretty reasonable, at least to me.

Yeah it doesn't have the greatest mod potential but cmon look at that list! I meanReally ?? credibility = 0

i wouldn't exactly call 15k for a turbo cheap... unless you're making six figures a year

But you're leaving out something just as important in the sports car market - people buying for looks. Let's take the 2015 sports car market. Yes there are cars faster than the Z in the segment. There are cars that handle better. There are cars that are cheaper and faster and handle if not better, damn close. But nothing that does all that and looks near as good. Given the options right now, I would still buy the Z over anything sub 100k.

That's what I never understood about everyone that 'upgraded' to the 5.0. Yeah it's faster, cheaper, cheaper to make faster and handles well, but have you seen it? Yes people that can buy more expensive cars often will, but sometimes it isn't enough. Like I said, the next price bracket I am interested in is around 150k mark (V10 R8). So even though I could buy say a 75-80k car, I'm still a long way from being able to afford anything that interests me as a follow up to the Z.



I said relative to changing up a class of car (from the Z's category to say the 911/GTR category)
You could have a car that's faster than the GTR, looks better and cost you 1/3 of what trading in the Z on a GTR did. No, 15k for FI isn't cheap compared to buying orange juice.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i mean everyone is just on this turbo band wagon now?

sure it's sweet... but it seems no one likes NA cars for some odd reason.

i like N/A more, but the Z can't squeeze out enough power without going FI.

i haven't seen one that's faster then a GTR yet.

There are a few people out there with more than the stock GT-R hp numbers. If you're talking drag strip times, then that's comparing RWD to AWD and not exactly apples to apples.

just because you achieve the GTR hp numbers doesn't mean it's going to handle like one. that's all i'm saying.

It will never handle like one. Is anyone arguing that? But if someone finally gets 800-1000 hp, you better believe a proper build will beat a stock GT-R on the drag strip.

There are those of us that are not HP junkies. I feel like the HP and torque with the Z is probably at the top of what I would want. OK, maybe a little more, but I don't need 425 HP. I like the Z for its appearance and the feeling I get when I sit behind the wheel. When I test drove a Z in 2012, I was sold on the level of performance. After the test drive, I got out and walked around it. Yea, I was sold on the look as well.

Would I buy another? I'm not sure. The market has changed. Would I look at a Mustang or Camaro? Sure, they have changed but ultimately, I don't think I would get one. They are both a 2+2 Coupe and I am more interested in an actual sports car and sitting lower to the ground. Of course the Toyobaru is also a 2+2 so I would probably look at it and ultimately not get that either. However, I really like the look of the 2016 MX-5.

http://media.caranddriver.com/images...-s-520x318.jpg

I would certainly test drive one of these. I did not test drive the previous model because I completely despised the look of the front end. This looks sweet and has very nice lines, top up and down. And if you want more, historically it has been very easy to find for the MX-5.

ok, i'm sure that's going to be way more then 15k to get it to 800-1000 and yes it would beat a stock gtr. however, then one can argue that you are building up a z to 800-1000 that it's only fair to build up a gtr and once again the z can't compete.

don't get me wrong i like my z, but it's not that cheap to mod one to get some numbers out of it. for it's price range in the low 30s brand new i think it's amazing.

Well it may cost a bit more than $15K to get that kind of power, but it certainly won't cost the $50K+ price difference between a new 370Z and new GT-R at their lowest price points (and currently it is closer to a $70K difference). So I could buy two new 370Z, put $20K into each, and have two vehicles that are at or above GT-R levels for the price of a new GT-R. That's all I'm trying to point out. And no it's not fair to build up the GT-R if you're comparing price points.

you can build hondas to keep up with stock a stock gtr, but it will never be a gtr. also, you could buy 2 new 370z's and put 20k in each if the price of a brand new z was 30k. i've seen gtr's here in GA go for 55-60k used of course.

additionally, i think that the people pushing 600+ hp in their z's have spent way more then 20k.

i never compared the price points between a gtr and a z. what i stated was that it's not cheap to build up a z as compared to some other cars.

I paid 31K new for my Z... and that was with the $3K Sports package. Also, plenty of people have 370Z near stock GT-R power (~545 hp) and didn't spend $20K to get there.

The Z is a little more expensive to mod because its more of a niche demographic. Also, NA cars are notoriously more difficult to coax hp out of the stock form than a factory turbo vehicle.

http://sociorocketnewsen.files.wordp...jpn-rest-4.png

:icon17:

sometimes yelling is just fun :D

that's about what i paid for my Z, close to 32 out the door with everything.

i personally don't know anyone with a turbo Z, just by looking at some of the build threads it looks expensive. and i agree about the N/A part with you

I think the reason why the % is lowest in the category (although it is above 66% which suggests that most people will rebuy it) is because the Z is at the price threshold where you can buy a boxter/cayman for a few grand more. Personally if my finances improve I could see myself getting into a Porsche as opposed to a Z. That doesn't imply that I dislike the Z, however.

I would love a Cayman. I priced one new. Quite literally, 3X as much initial outlay because they tag you for EVERY LITTLE EXTRA NUT AND BOLT, then service costs on top of that. I am not poor, but I AM Porsche poor.

i honestly would drive my 370z before a cayman, i'm not into them at all. Now a Carrera 4s, i'd be interested in, but also way out of my price range lol

I agree with all of that -- and I think it's fair to add that, ironically, actual performance is frequently trumped by perceived performance (i.e., more bhp doesn't always mean faster; lighter/tighter turning radius doesn't necessarily mean better in the slalom).

As to looks, although I suggested leaving the FF's and AWD's out of the debate, the very fact that 4-door rally cars -- vehicles that have nothing in common with the aesthetics of a "classic" sports car -- were big players in the sporty car segment speaks volumes on the range of body styles that can be construed as appropriate for a "sports car".

On the other hand, all over the world, sleek FF's are much beloved as sporty (if not "sports") cars, but a lot less so in the US.

Then there's the weird obsession (mainly in the US...) with the physical size of the car. Little cars tend to be associated with less manliness, (which is pretty stupid, but people also tend to like watching heavyweights pummel each other in the ring over watching welterweights). Pony cars are cross shopped by consumers looking for a sporty car simply on the basis of size (a lot of guys don't want a "girly" little car), and, again, ironically, not in regard to how the size helps or hamstrings actual performance.

On that note, in the US in particular, all things being equal, nothing looks more sporty than a high horsepower rating for the car you drive.

How many people have posted about how much they would like the Z35 to have a V8 or turbo? It ain't for looks.

Horsepower is like money....there are lot ugly men with gorgeous women and vice versa because money and power are the worlds greatest aphrodisiacs!!!

Here's my take on this. After daily driving my Z for the last 2 & 1/2 years, it has been trouble free and I really enjoy driving this car. For me, I can't figure out any other car that would be a better bang for my driving enjoyment buck than the Z.

Please keep in mind, I have unlimited access to a FRS and GTI anytime I want but Z key is the one always in my pocket. However in a couple of years, I can see other priorities in my life becoming more important than owning a Z. So it looks like a four seater may be in the cards for me and thus I would switch.

It's possible, like me, most owners enjoy their Z but their priorities made them choose a different vehicle.

LOL and then a kid like me who sees a killer deal because that mid-life crisis car is actually not that great for a family....

:happydance:

Come to Hawaii in about 2 years and a 13Z may be purchased for a good price :tiphat:

Why do people keep comparing the Z and gt-r in drag conversatios? The Z isn't a drag car. If you built a Z to 1000 hp, sure it could take a gt-r in a drag, but the gt-r will whip it in actual track performance. A super high power Z will never be a GT-R. There's nothing wrong with that. I just don't like people talking like the only thing that separates the 2 in performance is the HP difference. That all being said, I would rather have a boosted Z than a gt-r because it just looks so much better.

cause the nissan badge make them identical cars.

Actually past mid life crisis. A 4 seater will be more practical to shuttle aged parents to doctor, grocery store and pick up potential grand kids in the future.

Sounds like it's time for two cars.