![]() |
|
Take a look at some of the cars the Z was faster then. I will stand by while some people try and explain this.
|
Quote:
|
01:27.5: 370z Vs.
01:31.8 Nissan 350Z Must have been done with the VQ35DE engines. 4 sec. diff it's an enormous difference and compared with C&D lighting lap times, this just says completely the opposite: Nissan did an excellent job improving the z. 01:30.0 Ford Shelby GT500 really? quicker than a Shelby? :icon14: |
All of these times are worthless IMO.
|
This whole thread is one of the most worthless threads on the forum, with lots of nissan and non-nissan fanboyism and one-sidedness.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The only track time worth anything is the one you can personally achieve. Not R&T, not C&D, top gear or anyone. What counts is what you can do in your own car. AND YES, The car mags ARE NOT always the fastest time for any car, nor the slowest. SHYT changes often in the sport. |
You know, from the SNL skit?
|
I don't even remember the original question at this point. To recap, the Z is a good sports car. There are other good sports cars too. Some cost more. Some cost less. Buy whatever gets your pants tight. Is that about right?
|
Quote:
|
Dat Blue Doe.
On topic kinda, the only time that isn't worthless is those driven by the Stig :stirthepot: :icon17: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Thread revival!! On a side note, the 350 they tested and got that 1:31 was a DE. Which tied an E46 M3 and an rx8. The 370 handed it to a bmwZ4 3.5. I vaguely remember the 370 was like 8/10 slower than a C6. Same old Clarkson, albeit, he was gentler. He admitted its a faster sports car than the $62K BMW, but hated it because it wasnt refined like the BMW...
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:36 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2