Nissan 370Z Forum

Nissan 370Z Forum (http://www.the370z.com/)
-   Nissan 370Z Photos / Spyshots / Video / Media Gallery (http://www.the370z.com/nissan-370z-photos-spyshots-video-media-gallery/)
-   -   MotorTrend First Test: 2009 Nissan 370Z test drive 4.7 sec 0 to 60 11.25.08 (http://www.the370z.com/nissan-370z-photos-spyshots-video-media-gallery/427-motortrend-first-test-2009-nissan-370z-test-drive-4-7-sec-0-60-11-25-08-a.html)

AK370Z 11-25-2008 09:23 PM

MotorTrend First Test: 2009 Nissan 370Z test drive 4.7 sec 0 to 60 11.25.08
 
Putting the Sting Back in the Z -- 0 to 60 In 4.7 sec. and the Quarter Mile (1/4 mile) in 13.3 sec. at 105.7 MPH

http://image.motortrend.com/f/roadte...rhead_view.jpg


Quote:

When we evaluate a group of cars at the test track, it's often the case that we inadvertently get to compare dissimilar vehicles, be it contrasting type (sports car versus SUV), configuration (coupe versus sedan), engine (V-6 versus V-12), or simply price point. Side by side, these unrelated vehicles can often shed light on one another at revealing angles, making some cars shine and others lose luster. As luck would have it, the day we recorded numbers on the all-new Nissan 370Z was the same day we conducted our very first test of the Aston Martin DBS. Surely the DBS would embarrass the Z, no?

Looking at the two, in person or on paper, they do share apparent similarities. Each is a front-engine, rear-drive sports car offering seating for two adults and a low-slung stance a mere hand's width off the ground. Yet, the idea that a $34,000 Z would be a match for a $278,000 Aston, much less outperform it in some respects, never crossed our minds, especially considering the Brit has six cylinders and 178 horsepower on the Nissan. Plus, the DBS is the Aston Martin, the flagship of the brand, not to mention James Bond's transporter. And the Z? Sure, it's Nissan's iconic nameplate, but it's more for those working nine to five than it is for 007. But like Rocky Balboa's left hook, a blue-collar punch can pack a potent sting.

http://image.motortrend.com/f/roadte...front_view.jpg

The 510-horsepower V-12 DBS certainly is daunting. Peruse the spec panel and there's no denying its imposing credentials: 0-to-60 in 4.2 seconds, quarter mile in 12.6 at 112.3 mph, lateral acceleration of 0.96 g, and 60-to-0 in 106 feet. In fact, all those figures are superior to those of the Ferrari 612 Scaglietti. As we said, "It's the quickest, stickiest, and shortest-stopping Aston Martin we've ever tested." But is it quicker than the new 370Z? Well, yes.

Locked and loaded with a 332-horsepower, 3.7-liter VQ37VHR V-6 and unique "SynchroRev Match" six-speed manual, which blips the throttle on downshifts without a heel-toe maneuver, the Z rips to 60 in just 4.7 ticks on its way to a quarter-mile run of 13.3 at 105.7. While not an equal to the DBS, the 370Z is speedier than the racebred 306-horse. 3.5-liter Nismo 350Z we tested in 2007, which ran 4.9 and 13.5 at 103.9, respectively, thus making the 370 the quickest production Z we've ever tested. Further, the 370Z does match the Aston' in braking (106 feet) and even manages to exceed it in lateral acceleration, posting a Rubber Cement score of 0.99 g. This also makes the 370 the stickiest Z we've ever tested. (Alas, it's not the shortest-stopping Z, as the Nismo recorded 60 to 0 in 103 feet.)


http://image.motortrend.com/f/roadte...+side_view.jpg

So what's the 370Z's secret? Simply put: Nissan turned to the tried-and-true sports-car formula of cutting weight, reducing size, and adding power. The Z diet from 350 to 370 included hacking 3.9 inches from the wheelbase, 2.7 inches from the overall length, and 0.3 inch from the height as well as replacing numerous steel pieces, namely, the doors, rear hatch, front suspension cradle, and hood reinforcements, with parts made from lighter aluminum. Nissan even managed to trim mass from the fuel tank and audio and exhaust systems. The net weight reduction, according to Nissan, is around 88 pounds, depending on trim, although our scales indicate the 370Z with the optional Sport Package (viscous limited-slip differential, 19-inch forged Rays wheels, Bridgestone tires, Akebono brakes, SynchroRev Match, front and rear spoilers, 0.29 Cd) weighs 12 pounds more than the Nismo 350Z. That said, our tester does represent enhanced equipment, i.e., larger (and heavier) tires and brakes, not to mention the more powerful 3.7-liter V-6, which, according to Z project manager Peter Bedrosian, "packs an additional 42 pounds compared with the 3.5-liter."

http://image.motortrend.com/f/113474...70Z+gauges.jpg

Nonetheless, given the 370's superior acceleration and handling, we'll take the stouter 3.7 and any negligible weight gain, especially considering the new Z's stiffer structure (up 22 percent in rear torsion and 30 percent in front torsion and rear vertical bending) and fiercer facade, whose cantilevered roof, "barbed" head- and taillamps, and 240Z-like upswept beltline give the 370 a tighter, sexier shape. More important, the 370's structural and visual enhancements only complement its stellar driving dynamics. Its organic steering is a model of linearity and responsiveness. Its brakes, with a variable-ratio pedal, are stout and easy to modulate, whether decelerating gently for a red light or aggressively for a hairpin. Its grip is immense, rendering instant turn-in and near-absent understeer. The most alluring aspect of the new Z is the sense it imparts: It feels sharp, direct, and balanced, a well-honed santoku knife to the 350Z's blunter and bulkier cleaver.

http://image.motortrend.com/f/113474...gear_shift.jpg

Naturally, there are a few characteristics of the new Z with which we're not entirely enamored. The VQ engine, while more powerful and polished than its predecessor, still exhibits a coarseness near redline. Further, that coarseness rears its unwelcome head in the gearbox and pedals, transmitting a slight vibration to your hands and feet when firing off high-rpm shifts. One remedy, however, is to opt for the new seven-speed automatic with paddles shifters and a downshift rev-matching system. We've sampled this transmission in the Infiniti G37 S, and it's one of the sportiest and smoothest slushboxes around. Better yet, it achieves the same fuel economy-18 city/26 highway-as the manual.

http://image.motortrend.com/f/113474...70Z+engine.jpg

One aspect of the 370 we can't harp on is the interior, which Nissan has upgraded with finer materials (read: less hard plastic), bigger gauges, a race-style oval steering wheel, a convenient glovebox (the poorly placed one between the 350Z's seats has been laid to rest), and a useable cargo area (Nissan inverted the rear strut tower brace that denied access to large suitcases in the 350Z's hold). For a grander environment, the upscale 370Z Touring trim adds leather, Bluetooth, and Bose audio. Both the standard Z and the Touring can be equipped with the Sport Package, but only the Touring is available with navigation.

http://image.motortrend.com/f/113474...70Z+engine.jpg

Pricing? As this goes to press, Nissan has announced only a base price, which, at $30,625, represents a hike of $800 next to a comparably equipped 350Z with side and curtain airbags. In view of its enhanced power and handling, slick SynchroRev Match feature, and chic duds inside and out, the 370Z epitomizes a sports-car steal. To its competitors-heck, even the DBS-that's gotta sting.


AK370Z 11-25-2008 09:29 PM

http://www.the370z.com/images/370zfo...end%20370z.PNG

http://www.the370z.com/images/370zfo...nd%20370z2.PNG

http://www.the370z.com/images/370zfo...trend370z4.PNG

Source: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...est/index.html

AK370Z 11-25-2008 09:30 PM

Sweet Jesus!!! 4.7 seconds 0 to 60??:eek:

:worship:

RCZ 11-26-2008 05:28 PM

Im leaning more towards the edmunds review of 5.1.

ZEEDREAMER 11-26-2008 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RCZ (Post 3490)
Im leaning more towards the edmunds review of 5.1.

C'mon, 5.1 is what the fatass Mustang GT gets (new one). 4.7 sounds bang on to me.

AK370Z 11-26-2008 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZEEDREAMER (Post 3517)
C'mon, 5.1 is what the fatass Mustang GT gets (new one). 4.7 sounds band on to me.

True but lets keep in mind it'll be really hard for any of us to achieve that run. They basically beat the crap out of the car since a. It's not their car and b. They are told by Nissan to push the car to it's ultimate limit (gotta love their job huh!). But an average Joe like you and me, would never push their car to that limit. They probably had to do at least 10+ very hard launches to get that number. Even though the number is impressive and good for their (Nissan) sale, 5.1 is bit more realistic.

RCZ 11-27-2008 02:14 AM

Umm, I Dont know about that. Im sure I could get a pretty fast time close to that right away. Never had any problem launching any cars.... Would I do it? yes, I definitely dont baby my cars :)

AK370Z 11-27-2008 02:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RCZ (Post 3568)
Umm, I Dont know about that. Im sure I could get a pretty fast time close to that right away. Never had any problem launching any cars.... Would I do it? yes, I definitely dont baby my cars :)

I guess I gotta make a section called "370Z 1/4 mile". :icon17: Hope to see you at the track soon ;)

koojo 11-27-2008 01:00 PM

Does it matter if it's 4.7 or 5.1? Either way, it's friggin fast. I wonder if the 7spd AT performs the same.

o0javi0o 11-27-2008 07:21 PM

jaw breaker..... 4.7 n' 13.3.... ffffffffffffffffffffffffffast.

RCZ 11-27-2008 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by koojo (Post 3604)
Does it matter if it's 4.7 or 5.1? Either way, it's friggin fast. I wonder if the 7spd AT performs the same.

Yes, it does matter a lot. 4 tenths to 60 is a huge difference.

Endgame 11-27-2008 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AK370Z (Post 3524)
True but lets keep in mind it'll be really hard for any of us to achieve that run. They basically beat the crap out of the car since a. It's not their car and b. They are told by Nissan to push the car to it's ultimate limit (gotta love their job huh!). But an average Joe like you and me, would never push their car to that limit. They probably had to do at least 10+ very hard launches to get that number. Even though the number is impressive and good for their (Nissan) sale, 5.1 is bit more realistic.

Ummm.... the current HR Z's can get to 60 in 5.1; the G37 7AT does 0-60 in 5 seconds flat. The stated 4.7 seems VERY right for this car. My guess is that the AT is as fast if not faster than that.

Speaking of average Joe's... When will you do a full on launch of the car from dead stop like Edmunds did? More than likely, you will have a small rollout, then get on the gas. If so, expect 4.9 0-60 as Edmunds also stated (although it is probally better than that real life).

RCZ 11-28-2008 12:17 PM

Hmm, I dont know... 4.7 is possible, just not very good for the car. I wouldnt call it very right either. 5.0s would be more likely...

Endgame 11-28-2008 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RCZ (Post 3739)
Hmm, I dont know... 4.7 is possible, just not very good for the car. I wouldnt call it very right either. 5.0s would be more likely...

So, a car that weighs 300 pounds less with equal power will do the same 0-60??? G37 does 0-60 in 5 seconds....

sbsmoov 11-28-2008 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Endgame (Post 3743)
So, a car that weighs 300 pounds less with equal power will do the same 0-60??? G37 does 0-60 in 5 seconds....

I agree with you completely. If the G37 does 0-60 in 5 secs and weighs 300 lbs more than the 370z, then a 4.7 sec 0-60 for the 370z is very plausable. Nay sayers are simply talking out of their AS*, and their skepticism is based on nothing factual. On what basis are they doubting Motor Trend's test results.

sbsmoov 11-28-2008 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RCZ (Post 3739)
Hmm, I dont know... 4.7 is possible, just not very good for the car. I wouldnt call it very right either. 5.0s would be more likely...

4.7 secs not very good for the car???? What does that mean? Should it be quicker? And then you say 5 secs more likely. I have no idea what you're trying to say.

sbsmoov 11-28-2008 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AK370Z (Post 3524)
True but lets keep in mind it'll be really hard for any of us to achieve that run. They basically beat the crap out of the car since a. It's not their car and b. They are told by Nissan to push the car to it's ultimate limit (gotta love their job huh!). But an average Joe like you and me, would never push their car to that limit. They probably had to do at least 10+ very hard launches to get that number. Even though the number is impressive and good for their (Nissan) sale, 5.1 is bit more realistic.


I thought the purpose of these tests is to assess the maximum performance of a vehicle--to push it to the limits. Whether or not we are able to achieve the same results is irrelevant because most of us are not professional drivers.

Would you prefer that the car be driven and tested by a layperson or your grandma? Would that provide an accurate assessment of the car's maximum performance? Of course not! It would be more of an assessment of the driver's lack of skill.

For example, do you think most of us can achieve the same results as those of a professional race car driver? Of course not. The reason professional drivers are used is to get the best possible assessment of a vehicle's performance when driven skillfully or as close to perfect as possible.

To be skeptical of MotorTrend's test results based on a belief that "an average Joe like you and me, would never push their car to that limit" is missing the point completely. The point is this: what's the maximum level of performance that's achievable from a vehicle when it's driven at the limits or as close to perfect as possible.

RCZ 11-28-2008 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sbsmoov (Post 3746)
I agree with you completely. If the G37 does 0-60 in 5 secs and weighs 300 lbs more than the 370z, then a 4.7 sec 0-60 for the 370z is very plausable. Nay sayers are simply talking out of their AS*, and their skepticism is based on nothing factual. On what basis are they doubting Motor Trend's test results.

First of all, sbsmoov, Motortrend has a history of posting lower times than just about any other "reputable" source. Haha, I literally chuckled when I saw these responses. Guys, the car is awesome, specially for the price. Also, I've already said I'm buying the car as soon as it comes out. I'm not a naysayer, I'm just being realistic. Edmunds reported very different numbers for just about every benchmark test than did MT. So if you're going to take one review as the absolute truth, then why not the other one? Because its less convenient? You should take these reviews with a grain of salt, not just believe everything they tell you as fact. As far as it being plausible, I thought that was exactly what I said on my previous posts...

You should check out this intake in the engine section of the forum, its dyno proven to give you 25HP to the wheels!!!! I hear it makes a ton of noise too. That should get you into the 4.6s range.

Don't even get me started on that 13.3 quarter mile.


LOL professional drivers???? Of course..all these fat old guys who review the cars are all professional drivers...

sbsmoov 11-28-2008 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RCZ (Post 3756)
First of all, sbsmoov, Motortrend has a history of posting lower times than just about any other "reputable" source. Haha, I literally chuckled when I saw these responses. Guys, the car is awesome, specially for the price. Also, I've already said I'm buying the car as soon as it comes out. I'm not a naysayer, I'm just being realistic. Edmunds reported very different numbers for just about every benchmark test than did MT. So if you're going to take one review as the absolute truth, then why not the other one? Because its less convenient? You should take these reviews with a grain of salt, not just believe everything they tell you as fact. As far as it being plausible, I thought that was exactly what I said on my previous posts...

You should check out this intake in the engine section of the forum, its dyno proven to give you 25HP to the wheels!!!! I hear it makes a ton of noise too. That should get you into the 4.6s range.

Don't even get me started on that 13.3 quarter mile.


LOL professional drivers???? Of course..all these fat old guys who review the cars are all professional drivers...



You have faith in Edmunds? They have both the GTR and the ZR1 doing 0-60 in 3.8 secs. Ridiculous at best! That's why I don't respect their reviews.

As far as my comment about professional drivers...I was simply making a point and was not suggesting that reviews by MotorTrend, Edmunds, etc are all done by professional drivers. I simply stated the reason why professional drivers are sometimes used.

RCZ 11-28-2008 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sbsmoov (Post 3761)
You have faith in Edmunds? They have both the GTR and the ZR1 doing 0-60 in 3.8 secs. Ridiculous at best! That's why I don't respect their reviews.

As far as my comment about professional drivers...I was simply making a point and was not suggesting that reviews by MotorTrend, Edmunds, etc are all done by professional drivers. I simply stated the reason why professional drivers are sometimes used.

Once again, I in fact said exactly the opposite; man take a second to read my posts before you answer them. I said you should take the reviews with a grain of salt because they are often not the be-all and end-all definitive sources for performance figures. NOT that I have any more faith in edmunds than I do in MT. In fact I dont trust either. The only reasons I read those reviews are 1) because they give you a better feel for the driving experience from people who have driven a lot of cars and 2) because there is no other real information to read.

And sorry about the second part, it just really really sounded like you were saying professional drivers were used to get the maximum possible performance as close to perfect as possible. I misunderstood.

Finally, All I'm saying is that 4.7s to 60 would be fantastic, but in my personal opinion it seems a little too optimistic for a 300rwhp (probably under that with the 19s) 3350lbs + driver car. Thats all. We will know better as more tests are done. Hopefully its closer to 4.7 than to 5, time will tell.

Endgame 11-28-2008 07:09 PM

RCZ... Look at the G37!!!! 0-60 5.0 SECONDS!!!

The Z weighs 300 pounds less!!!!!!! It WILL be lower!!! Use the G37 as you benchmark.

Although, I see what you are doing. You are looking at the glass half full, that way when REAL times come back better than Edmunds is reporting, you are overjoyed!!!

RCZ 11-29-2008 01:03 AM

Something like that...Should we believe it can do .99g on the skidpad too?
May I point out that an F430 can only manage .95g, that a Pagani Zonda could only muster .96g? Hey at least the Enzo was able to beat it by .06g's...

Hey, maybe they had GT-R tires on it for the test.

Anyway, I'm not talking smack about the car, I'm just keeping you humble because next thing you know this forum is filled with fanboys spreading all sorts of crazy fabricated facts. I can't wait to see it, much less drive it, just like everyone else on here. I think its going to be a great car, but lets not get ahead of ourselves here because we may look a little silly later on when we can't walk the walk...

Endgame 11-29-2008 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RCZ (Post 3778)
Something like that...Should we believe it can do .99g on the skidpad too?
May I point out that an F430 can only manage .95g, that a Pagani Zonda could only muster .96g? Hey at least the Enzo was able to beat it by .06g's...

Hey, maybe they had GT-R tires on it for the test.

Anyway, I'm not talking smack about the car, I'm just keeping you humble because next thing you know this forum is filled with fanboys spreading all sorts of crazy fabricated facts. I can't wait to see it, much less drive it, just like everyone else on here. I think its going to be a great car, but lets not get ahead of ourselves here because we may look a little silly later on when we can't walk the walk...

The old speak softly and carry a big stick game plan. I'm game...

sbsmoov 11-29-2008 11:21 AM

RCZ, what performance numbers do you have for the Cayman S? And from which publication?

RCZ 11-29-2008 12:18 PM

Cayman S?? Which one? the new one with the 320hp motor or the old one with the 295hp motor? Because for the new one, which weighs under 3000lbs and has 320hp gets a 0-60 of 4.9 and a skidpad of .96g

I don't take any single publication, I look at at least 5 different publications and estimate the average. The new Cayman is going to be a very tight competitor to the Z, I think people who can afford both are going to start leaning towards the Porsche now.

sbsmoov 11-29-2008 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RCZ (Post 3808)
Cayman S?? Which one? the new one with the 320hp motor or the old one with the 295hp motor? Because for the new one, which weighs under 3000lbs and has 320hp gets a 0-60 of 4.9 and a skidpad of .96g

I don't take any single publication, I look at at least 5 different publications and estimate the average. The new Cayman is going to be a very tight competitor to the Z, I think people who can afford both are going to start leaning towards the Porsche now.

Didn't the old one do 4.9 secs to 60 too? The new one is under 3000 lbs? Incredible! How did they pull that off.

Endgame 11-29-2008 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RCZ (Post 3808)
Cayman S?? Which one? the new one with the 320hp motor or the old one with the 295hp motor? Because for the new one, which weighs under 3000lbs and has 320hp gets a 0-60 of 4.9 and a skidpad of .96g

I don't take any single publication, I look at at least 5 different publications and estimate the average. The new Cayman is going to be a very tight competitor to the Z, I think people who can afford both are going to start leaning towards the Porsche now.

That's odd... I also thought the old one did 0-60 in 4.9. I can see why you were leaning towards the Z doing 0-60 in 5.1 if the Cayman is 4.9 (weight difference). However, the Z4M coupe did 0-60 in 4.8 I think which is faster than the Cayman and it has similar stats to the 370Z.

If the new Cayman is doing 4.9 only, maybe the new Z WILL be a match for it!! This should be interesting....

M.Bonanni 11-29-2008 02:24 PM

You guys are forgetting probably the most important thing in regards to 0-60 times....gearing. What is the first gear ratio on the 370Z compared to the 350Z and all of the other cars you are comparing it to. Manufacturers play all kinds of games to get good 0-60 times, in fact I have heard that Corvettes are geared to go up to 60mph in first gear so they don't have to shift in 0-60 tests.

To me, the only reviews that I trust and hold any value to are lap times around road courses.

Minicobra1 11-29-2008 02:52 PM

What's up everyone, this is my first post so don't beat me up too bad :icon17: I was in the Market for a BMW 135i, but after seeing the 370z at the Edmonds event and reading the road test, I've been converted.

First off, I believe that the 4.7 to 60 Motortrend result is true and factual as well as the Edmonds test. I've done work for both these magazines and they are not going to post up false times. Weather or not they can get consitent 4.7 is questionable though.

Everyone here is talking about weight vs. HP, but knowone has mentioned, gear ratios,(except DD) drag coefecient, tire pressure, weight transfer, track temperature, etc. All of these things play a factor in 0-60 times.
When they do these test, they heat up the tires with many burn-outs, experiment with tire pressure, launch RPM's, and make sure that they are not going into a head wind. In the real world you won't be able to do that at a traffic light, but nevertheless, this cars magazine road test is no different then any other cars road test, so it's safe to say this is an accurate bench mark of the vehicles maximum performance in it's stock guise, when pushed to the limit.

Knowing that the 370z has lower drag, shorter wheelbase, stronger drive shaft, better traction, I have no doubt that with the right driver, car, and perfect road conditions that this time is acheivable. Either way, this is one quick great handling car and you can count me in at the dealership when they go on sale. :driving:

Braden

Endgame 11-29-2008 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minicobra1 (Post 3828)
What's up everyone, this is my first post so don't beat me up too bad :icon17: I was in the Market for a BMW 135i, but after seeing the 370z at the Edmonds event and reading the road test, I've been converted.

First off, I believe that the 4.7 to 60 Motortrend result is true and factual as well as the Edmonds test. I've done work for both these magazines and they are not going to post up false times. Weather or not they can get consitent 4.7 is questionable though.

Everyone here is talking about weight vs. HP, but knowone has mentioned, gear ratios,(except DD) drag coefecient, tire pressure, weight transfer, track temperature, etc. All of these things play a factor in 0-60 times.
When they do these test, they heat up the tires with many burn-outs, experiment with tire pressure, launch RPM's, and make sure that they are not going into a head wind. In the real world you won't be able to do that at a traffic light, but nevertheless, this cars magazine road test is no different then any other cars road test, so it's safe to say this is an accurate bench mark of the vehicles maximum performance in it's stock guise, when pushed to the limit.

Knowing that the 370z has lower drag, shorter wheelbase, stronger drive shaft, better traction, I have no doubt that with the right driver, car, and perfect road conditions that this time is acheivable. Either way, this is one quick great handling car and you can count me in at the dealership when they go on sale. :driving:

Braden

Nice first post! So, another 135i convert! I was looking at the 1 until more information and spy pics leaked of this mini Godzilla. :tup:

Minicobra1 11-30-2008 07:44 AM

Endgame,

Yeah, I was pretty much sold on the 135i, had my wheels, suspension, everything picked out, then I got an invite to see the new Z.
The best thing about the 370Z is that it is about $8k less and the same if not better performance. And that's without forced induction, can't wait to see what a turbo or twin turbo kit will do for this car.
I'm a big fan of wide tires, I really like the fact that the 19's with 275 rears fit no problem, which means you could probably stuff a 295 or 305 under there. Good luck getting anything wider then a 255 on the Bimmer without rubbing.

Endgame 11-30-2008 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minicobra1 (Post 3894)
Endgame,

Yeah, I was pretty much sold on the 135i, had my wheels, suspension, everything picked out, then I got an invite to see the new Z.
The best thing about the 370Z is that it is about $8k less and the same if not better performance. And that's without forced induction, can't wait to see what a turbo or twin turbo kit will do for this car.
I'm a big fan of wide tires, I really like the fact that the 19's with 275 rears fit no problem, which means you could probably stuff a 295 or 305 under there. Good luck getting anything wider then a 255 on the Bimmer without rubbing.


Same with me! I was going BMW performance suspension and doing the Tii treatment. Glad to have a fellow convert on the boards.

AK370Z 11-30-2008 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minicobra1 (Post 3894)
Endgame,

Yeah, I was pretty much sold on the 135i, had my wheels, suspension, everything picked out, then I got an invite to see the new Z.
The best thing about the 370Z is that it is about $8k less and the same if not better performance. And that's without forced induction, can't wait to see what a turbo or twin turbo kit will do for this car.
I'm a big fan of wide tires, I really like the fact that the 19's with 275 rears fit no problem, which means you could probably stuff a 295 or 305 under there. Good luck getting anything wider then a 255 on the Bimmer without rubbing.

:tup: Absolutely. 370Z offers the best bang for the buck and you get to listen to the amazing throaty exhaust.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edmunds.com
The Numbers Tell the Story
The numbers tell the story. The 2008 BMW 135i coupe gets to 100 kph (62 mph) in just 5.3 seconds and the standing kilometer (fast becoming a standard performance benchmark among Europe's more sporting carmakers) in 24.6 seconds. To give this speed some perspective, the new 2008 BMW M3 is just 0.5 second and 1.3 seconds quicker to the same marks respectively. Even more important, this 135i coupe will rip from 50-75 mph in 4th gear in just 5.0 seconds — just 0.1 second slower than the latest M-car.

4.7s > 5.3s IMO :icon17:

BTW, great first post. Feel free to introduce yourself in the "New Member" section and post some pictures :pics: of your ride.

M.Bonanni 11-30-2008 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minicobra1 (Post 3894)
Endgame,

Yeah, I was pretty much sold on the 135i, had my wheels, suspension, everything picked out, then I got an invite to see the new Z.
The best thing about the 370Z is that it is about $8k less and the same if not better performance. And that's without forced induction, can't wait to see what a turbo or twin turbo kit will do for this car.
I'm a big fan of wide tires, I really like the fact that the 19's with 275 rears fit no problem, which means you could probably stuff a 295 or 305 under there. Good luck getting anything wider then a 255 on the Bimmer without rubbing.

The VQ35HR is already making 500+ on pump gas with just a bolt on turbo kit. :)

Also the current 350Z can fit 315s in the rear with fender rolling, so I am expecting the same or more out of the 370Z. The fenders on the 370Z come rolled from the factory too! When I saw it in person there was a TON of room back there.

This will be a bad a** car for sure.

RCZ 11-30-2008 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minicobra1 (Post 3828)
What's up everyone, this is my first post so don't beat me up too bad :icon17: I was in the Market for a BMW 135i, but after seeing the 370z at the Edmonds event and reading the road test, I've been converted.

No worries, no one is going to beat you up and Welcome to the forums!

Quote:

First off, I believe that the 4.7 to 60 Motortrend result is true and factual as well as the Edmonds test. I've done work for both these magazines and they are not going to post up false times. Weather or not they can get consitent 4.7 is questionable though.
No one said its not true, we are only discussing the validity of how that time represents the Z's normal actual performance. I don't doubt that with a nice launch and everything going very right, the Z can hit 60 in 4.7s. As you said, they probably cant get it consistently.

Quote:

Everyone here is talking about weight vs. HP, but knowone has mentioned, gear ratios,(except DD) drag coefecient, tire pressure, weight transfer, track temperature, etc. All of these things play a factor in 0-60 times.
When they do these test, they heat up the tires with many burn-outs, experiment with tire pressure, launch RPM's, and make sure that they are not going into a head wind.
That's true, specially about the gear ratios. Gearing has everything to do with 0-60 times. The thread just didn't merit getting into anything other than power and weight until now. Also I think that yes, there are other factors to take into account to judge a 0-60 time, however this standard is loosely measured to give you a sense of the acceleration of the car regardless of how it does it. A 4.7 paints a very different picture to me than does a 5.1 run. What Im trying to get at here is not whether the car can muster a 4.7s to 60 run, but rather if it will consistently be closer to that number or to 5.1s...

Quote:

Knowing that the 370z has lower drag, shorter wheelbase, stronger drive shaft, better traction, I have no doubt that with the right driver, car, and perfect road conditions that this time is acheivable. Either way, this is one quick great handling car and you can count me in at the dealership when they go on sale. :driving:
Drag doesn't make any real difference to 60. Nor would a shorter wheelbase. Carbon driveshaft would more efficiently transfer the engine power to the wheels, but they dont like very hard shocks, that wouldnt help. Better traction, possibly with the 275s. Driver goes unsaid and car shouldnt be a variable.

RCZ 11-30-2008 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DDMotorsports (Post 3903)
The VQ35HR is already making 500+ on pump gas with just a bolt on turbo kit. :)

Also the current 350Z can fit 315s in the rear with fender rolling, so I am expecting the same or more out of the 370Z. The fenders on the 370Z come rolled from the factory too! When I saw it in person there was a TON of room back there.

This will be a bad a** car for sure.

I wouldn't put much bigger tires in the rear without upgrading the power. That would make for a lame car that doesn't like to rotate...With the turbo kit, thats a different story. I was excited about the fenders too! That new z has potential! RE30's 18x9.5" front and 19x12" in the back. Hoosier R6 all around. 295/35/18 on front and 345/30/19 on the rear. Yay $4000 wheel/tire package!:ugh2:

M.Bonanni 11-30-2008 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RCZ (Post 3908)
I wouldn't put much bigger tires in the rear without upgrading the power. That would make for a lame car that doesn't like to rotate...With the turbo kit, thats a different story.

Well that goes without saying.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RCZ (Post 3908)
I was excited about the fenders too! That new z has potential! RE30's 18x9.5" front and 19x12" in the back. Hoosier R6 all around. 295/35/18 on front and 345/30/19 on the rear. Yay $4000 wheel/tire package!:ugh2:

Too big of a stagger in my opinion. I have found that on the 350Zs at least I prefer a 20mm difference between front & rear max. I also like a shorter sidewall. I think my ideal setup would be what I run on my 350Z which is 295/30/18 front and 315/30/18 rear.

CrownR426 11-30-2008 02:41 PM

Those are sick numbers for a stock car @ this price!!!
OP do you know what trim this z was?
I'm thinking of just getting either base + sports or touring + sports...
Lighter the better [:

RCZ 11-30-2008 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DDMotorsports (Post 3937)
Well that goes without saying.

You'd be surprised...


Quote:

Too big of a stagger in my opinion. I have found that on the 350Zs at least I prefer a 20mm difference between front & rear max. I also like a shorter sidewall. I think my ideal setup would be what I run on my 350Z which is 295/30/18 front and 315/30/18 rear.
Of course its too big, those are Z06 settings hahaha...

295 up front?

M.Bonanni 11-30-2008 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RCZ (Post 3942)

295 up front?

Yep, thats what I currently run on my time attack 350Z.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:18 PM.

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