350z vs s2000
Registered User
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
From: Palisades Park
sigh... I give up, I was never saying that a 350z or s2k is faster... im just tryin to show some info about 350z. especially the autos. most people that drive autos just mash the gas when it comes to races which makes the car alot slower than it really is. i cant even crack 13'z unless I put it into manual mode, I usually actually drop around .4-.6 off my time.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
wisconsin i know i said "more top end" which was my error. You see I acknowledge when I am wrong and I can deal with it like an adult. The only way weight affects top speed is friction and thats a minuscule factor.... agreed. Weight affects acceleration up to top speed.
We can argue about which car is faster around a track all day long. And even then it's going to come down to the track and driver skill. So that's a moot point.
In a straight line it would be absurd to claim the cars are equally fast. You think because you can run the quarter close to what a Z does that you can continue to hang up into the triple digits? You're fooling yourself if you think so. You simply don't have the power:weight and aerodynamics to do so. Your gearing isn't going to do you any favors at those speeds either. The Z hits the 159 limiter with ease and has more power to go.
We can argue about which car is faster around a track all day long. And even then it's going to come down to the track and driver skill. So that's a moot point.
In a straight line it would be absurd to claim the cars are equally fast. You think because you can run the quarter close to what a Z does that you can continue to hang up into the triple digits? You're fooling yourself if you think so. You simply don't have the power:weight and aerodynamics to do so. Your gearing isn't going to do you any favors at those speeds either. The Z hits the 159 limiter with ease and has more power to go.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,906
Likes: 1
From: Chicago
Originally Posted by zulater,Jan 9 2006, 08:40 PM
wisconsin i know i said "more top end" which was my error. You see I acknowledge when I am wrong and I can deal with it like an adult. The only way weight affects top speed is friction and thats a minuscule factor.... agreed. Weight affects acceleration up to top speed.
We can argue about which car is faster around a track all day long. And even then it's going to come down to the track and driver skill. So that's a moot point.
In a straight line it would be absurd to claim the cars are equally fast. You think because you can run the quarter close to what a Z does that you can continue to hang up into the triple digits? You're fooling yourself if you think so. You simply don't have the power:weight and aerodynamics to do so. Your gearing isn't going to do you any favors at those speeds either. The Z hits the 159 limiter with ease and has more power to go.
You're the one who turned this into a pissing fest, so congrats on that. I think you're quite an antagonistic little man so I hope I'm pushing your little buttons. You deserve to be flamed. Good luck with your wet dream.
We can argue about which car is faster around a track all day long. And even then it's going to come down to the track and driver skill. So that's a moot point.
In a straight line it would be absurd to claim the cars are equally fast. You think because you can run the quarter close to what a Z does that you can continue to hang up into the triple digits? You're fooling yourself if you think so. You simply don't have the power:weight and aerodynamics to do so. Your gearing isn't going to do you any favors at those speeds either. The Z hits the 159 limiter with ease and has more power to go.
You're the one who turned this into a pissing fest, so congrats on that. I think you're quite an antagonistic little man so I hope I'm pushing your little buttons. You deserve to be flamed. Good luck with your wet dream.
P.S. I think it's time for you to give up...
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,223
Likes: 4
From: Orange County, CA
1. the 350z has more power, as well as having better aerodynamics. (fairly obvious, compare numbers, and the S is a convertable...). Therefore, the 350z should definately have more top end.
2. as for turning, as you cant do a 'paper comparison', I wont delve into it.
3. for low end acceleration, the S is geared very agressively, and weighs less. Thus, this *could* make up for lesser power. In this particular case, it would seem that the 350z and S2000 are about equal in the 1/4.
2. as for turning, as you cant do a 'paper comparison', I wont delve into it.
3. for low end acceleration, the S is geared very agressively, and weighs less. Thus, this *could* make up for lesser power. In this particular case, it would seem that the 350z and S2000 are about equal in the 1/4.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 772
Likes: 0
From: Melbourne, Australia
Originally Posted by psychoazn,Jan 10 2006, 06:15 PM
1. the 350z has more power, as well as having better aerodynamics. (fairly obvious, compare numbers, and the S is a convertable...). Therefore, the 350z should definately have more top end.
2. as for turning, as you cant do a 'paper comparison', I wont delve into it.
3. for low end acceleration, the S is geared very agressively, and weighs less. Thus, this *could* make up for lesser power. In this particular case, it would seem that the 350z and S2000 are about equal in the 1/4.
2. as for turning, as you cant do a 'paper comparison', I wont delve into it.
3. for low end acceleration, the S is geared very agressively, and weighs less. Thus, this *could* make up for lesser power. In this particular case, it would seem that the 350z and S2000 are about equal in the 1/4.
#2 - S2K is superior at Auto-X, and most road courses...I'd say it does better @ 'turning'.
