I don't understand why some of you hate so much on other cars.

The new Z is a solid buy.

 

Well, some pictures of the convertible used to be on http://www.nissandriven.com but I don't see them anymore

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by WRS2K
[B]I don't understand why some of you hate so much on other cars.

 

yeah.....the new Z is a great car.....u get a lot for 26k (the base price)......

nice interior too!!

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by WRS2K
[B]I don't understand why some of you hate so much on other cars.

 

I have seen tons and tons of maxima's, stanza's, Nissan trucks, etc... with 200k+ miles, so I think the quality is fine (in general). I personally only had one stanza and it was good. I think the 'Z' looks like a great buy for $27-$32k (not the fully loaded one though at $35k+. It is a bit heavy, but still a pretty decent ride for the price!

Scot

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Destiny2002
[B]

I have the right to speak my mind.

 

The Z is more like a grand touring car, not a no compromise sports car. The Z has not been a true sports car since the last of the original Z's back in '78. I had a '79 280ZX for seven years. It was a great highway cruiser but it sucked at the track and at autocrosses. However, it was the most reliable car I have ever had and last time I checked it was still running strong.
I like the new Z but would not consider it unless they made a real track version, which was less than 3000 pounds.

 

I think the 350 will be a solid hit, meeting the needs of more buyers than the S2000, and w/ commensurately greater supply. I don't think it's better or worse than our beloved S2000, just different.

Also, I don't get the complaints about it being expensive when you consider all the power (forget mag times, it will feel much stronger than the S2000 due to the tq.) and features (DVD nav., indash CD changer, side air bags, C/F driveshaft, Brembo brakes, Rays wheels, etc.). I'm not planning to trade for one, but give them credit for resurrecting the Z closer in spirit to the original.

 

Weighs 300 lbs less than an S4, and has 30+ HP than an S4....

oh yea, the E46 M3's heavier too.

But 14.1, I just don't get it. Was it an automatic?

 

Just finished reading the C&D article. Thought it was funny how they were talking about its cleanly bisecting the market between the MR2 Spyder and the Boxster S. Um, hello, what about us?

If it were a 2+2, if the track model were truer to its name, or there were a turbo version, then it'd be something. But as it is, I don't see why anybody would spend the same amount of money and get less performance than and equivalent livability to an S2K with a hardtop.

Nissan should take a cue from Porsche (or Chevy even) and offer their track model as a stripped-down, beefed-up variant with stiffer suspension, lighter-weight parts, and more power - you know - 3000lbs, 300 hp. The car barely outperforms its cushier and roomier sister the G35, (the sedan with which it shares its platform!) and is going to get eaten alive by the S2K in auto-x/track outings. Though thinking about it, those big wheels will be an advantage in stock-class autocross - it'll be interesting to see where it gets classed.

On another note, the latest C&D has some good articles - everything from the Saleen S7 to a review of One Lap, to a little bit on the "drifting" scene in Hawaii. A good read.

p.s. Maximum interior recorded sound level by R&T (Sept. 2000) was 92db. The second loudest in the S2K/Boxster/M/TT shootout was the M at 81!