300zx vx 240sx

[1992Q45A]

Yea.. The G35 is getting a 15+ hp bump for 2005.. infinitinews.com

I can only imagine this will happen on the Z as well.. The G35 coupe will have at minimum 295hp, since the Z originally had more hp, it should get 300 or so.. Still, let's get some forced induction on it!

I wouldn't mind them putting the VK in the G/Z.. of course this would probably anger enthusiasts, as the weight would increase..

Bring back the turbo cars Japan......... please!!!!!!!!!!!! we all miss turbos

[jdmfreak]

I hear ya! I want to own a new GTR before gas becomes a luxury.

[1992Q45A]

Me to. God if the rumors are true, it's going to be simply amazing.

Lotus/Nissan bringing back an even more advanced active suspension. As well as an even more advanced attesa awd system.

Cosworth built block.. Dry sump system.

No lag turbos..

70k+ sticker

I'd finance myself into oblivion to own the next GTR. Keep it for ever, as I'm sure like all the GTRS that have came before it, it will be classic, and always so.

[Bubba1]

I'm sorry but this gen sucks..

So what we have the EVO and STI.. The 90s had these as well (Japan only)

We are finally get some sporty sub compact.. GREAT.. what about the ULTRA FAST 90s GT sports cars.. THERE ARE NONE!!!

The 350Z is a nice car.. It needs more power.. It has almost no tuneability from the factory, unlike the Z32.. Sure you can slap a TT kit on it, but this is a major expense.. The 90s turbo cars are gone, all that remains are the sub compact rally cars.. it's cool we have these, don't get me wrong, but they shouldn't be in place of the supra/rx7 etc..

Let's break this down.

MR2 is now the MRs.. don't even compare.. No turbo, no comparison

RX7.. Well we have the RX8.. not as fast, not nearly as tuneable.. doesn't handle as well.. If you've driven an FD, you understand the RX8 isn't in it's class, not even close.. The RX7 provided road racers a true pure sports car, capable of porsche like feel and control. The RX8 is a fun car to drive, but not in the same vein.

Supra? Well as stated before, the concept is FUGLY. According to autospies it's going to be some hybrid with 500+ hp.. This could be interesting.. A 3.5 gas engine with 300+ hp, and a 200 hp electric engine.. Cool, but I miss the outrageous old over engineered supra.. bring it back. .99G skidpad.. excellent slalom numbers.. Porsche turbo braking numbers.. infinite tuneability..

Z32, well there is the 350.. However factor in the Z32 was roughly the same price in 1990 as the 350z is now.. Factor in inflation and you have a car that costs thousands, if not tens of thousands more.. Nothing is for free, it's the same price for a reason..

yes we have the subcompact rice rocket rally cars.. Kudos to Japan to finally sending them over.. THANK YOU.. NOW BRING BACK THE crazy over engineered GT sports coupes that everyone fell in love with... Slap a turbo kit from the factory on the 350, this would be the first official car that could be considered the 90s GT rival.

The Z06 is awesome.. The Vette is awesome.. Every time it evolves it becomes better. The C6 and the eventual c6 z06 will be even better. These are american though, let's talk Japanese.

I guess you've got a different view of what a sports car is than me. (Also since we live in the US, we should discuss just cars that are available in the US). IMHO a sports car is not measured by pure horsepower or the ease of adding more horsepower.. It really comes down to the driving experience. A miata is just as much a sports car as a Z06.

And as far as this decade being great, I didn't list some of the other great sports cars that are being introduced. How about the Lotus Elise, or the Noble, or Ford GT, or Chrysler totally updated it's Viper, BMW replacing the butt-ugly and anemic Z3 with the slightly less ugly Z4, plus gave an adrenaline boost to its M3 or the upcoming all new M5. And before you discount the STi or Evo, I think you need to drive one on the track to understand how special they are. I've driven an Evo on the track. I'm a fan

And the 350Z is very much a great sports car. Who gives a flying fart that it comes with just 287 hp or costs a lot to supercharge. It's a FUN basic sports car, and is very much in the spirit of Nissan's first great sports car the 240z. I do agree that Mazda went in the wrong direction with their Rx-8, Then again, I think Nissan made a huge blunder by stuffing a freakin' pickup motor into the 240sx. And Toyota made the same blunder that Nissan did the 300ZX by growing the Supra. Sure it was a great car, but it was too expensive for its core market. If you'll remember toYota had trouble selling last generation Supras even with a big reduction in price. I also agree that Toyota ruined the MR2.The new ones are ugly. Though I think the restyled Celica is very attractive. it's just not a sports car.

I think this decade is looking much better than the 90's. but back to the original thread. Comparing a 300ZX vs. a 240sx. is like comparing a Supra to a Celica. Different league. Not even close.

[Goose93]

To many things to go wrong and make you slow. The GTR-34 was complex but it was still reasonable. If the rumors are true and they use magnetic turbo bypass valves and all ot the other gizmo devices it will stop being a a fun car to drive.

The worst idea I have see which is more than likely to happen is an "8 speed" CVT in the new GTR. This type of transmission has no place in a sports car.

I will only be interested if they just take a good design and massage it to be better.

i.e. a built and loved 6cylinder twin turbo. I could also be happy with a small capacity high rev 8 cylinder. The car with AWD and luxuries should not exceed 3200#, but 3500# would be acceptable. The car should also have ~350-400hp showroom.

Sadly with the Infinit badging in the US I don't see much of this happening. Nissan also seems to be in the mood to test every electro-mechanical system it can find to make this car.

We'll see....

[Sircnay]

Watch, I bet this drought of crappy "Sports" cars is just a way to get us hungry for them. The EVO and STI are just little appetizers for us. Then one day at the Detroit Autoshow:

Toyota reveals the MKIV MR2 which weighs like 2100lbs making 200bhp from the factory tune 2zzge, and their new Supra which has been redone to be an MR setup and it just plain sexy with a longitudinally mounted I-6 TT.

Nissan reveals their "Sport compact" car... Silvia. SR20DET US version putting down 200hp to the crank with ridiculously amounts of tunability. And in the booth next to it is the R35 skyline with its crazy I-6 n/a motor making 350hp to the crank.

Mazda reveals the RX-8T, nuff said. And right behind it is the Miata turbo making 200hp and not looking gay.

Honda revals its S2000T. A turbocharged k20 making 270hp. And their super exotic is the next gen of the NSX making like 300hp with a longitudinally mounted V6.

You know it'll happen.

[Bubba1]

I just read that Honda just pulled the plug on the next gen NSX.

[nametakennow]

Honestly, I think you all need to take a step back for a minute and look at cars in general. You're all looking at the upper echelon vehicles of these manufacturers. The fastest cars sold without obscene price tags, ever. To complain about the 350Z and RX8, for instance, being underpowered is ridiculous. Look at the horsepower numbers again. They're above the self imposed Japanese limit that has recently been abolished because of the fact that Nissan said "screw this crap, we're giving the Z 287hp!" Of course, we all know that at least the Supra and GT-R pushed out more than the limit, but were underrated on purpose, but automakers have come to the point where they can't keep using the old engines anymore, it's time for the next generation. Give Nissan, Toyota, etc some time to work on their next engines, eventually some will be as venerable as the RB, JZ, VG, and SRs of yore. All of the aforementioned engines were designed in the 80s, if not the late 70s, technology has changed, you can do more with less and without boost (unfortunately). I want all cars to have turbo(s) too, but it's just not going to happen when car companies can make an NA V6 with 287hp.

Look down the ladder and see where cars are making huge gains. The upper echelon of performance is in a transitional limbo, while the smaller sport compacts are coming alive. Think of how much the Sentra, Civic (yes, Civic), Integra (RSX) have gained recently. They're civilized, fun to drive, quick daily grocery-getters. Beyond that, you don't have to have 300whp to have fun, as much as I hate to say it. Power is useless if you can't handle it. Moreover, the average driver doesn't use all 287 of the Z's ponies on a daily basis, hell, most drivers wouldn't use all of my 150ish horses, which I use and enjoy daily with a glee unseen in most people. Not to mention that it is one of the best handling FWD cars, ever.

Cars aren't sucking, they're evolving.

[jEzTeR]

I think that the stock z32 vs stock 240 would be a fun road course race with the Z taking the win.Putting the better handling goodies on the 240 will help even the odds.Both are great Nissan's!

Too many other opinions to comment on.LOLI will say the the 350z is a great car.I have had mine for about 7 months and I love it more and more every time I drive it.It has surprised a few people at the track in stock form.As far as it costing a bunch to add the TT or SC kit well duhhh!It is a Z car.

That is all for now.

[1992Q45A]

The Lotus Elise is soooooooo awesome. 45k well spent, if you have it..

As for a CVT.. why not give it a shot.. It will still come with a manual. A 7 or 8 speed CVT is better then a default slushbox. Many enthusiasts bash on the M3s SMG, but it's nice to have as an option anyway. It is the fasest shifting transmission sold in any vehicle, period.

The GTR has always been about technical achievements.. It's no suprise the newest one will represent the newest tech available, just as the older ones did.

[Goose93]

A CVT or constantly variable transmission does not have gears. It uses a pulley system. By changing the sizes of the pulleys you change the drive ratio. This is the ultimate form of automatic. that is why it is great in a murano or Maxima or any other econo-box, sedan, or luxury car. But it DOES NOT belong in a sports car.

Almost every tip-tronic, pabble shift, or smg is still an automatic transmission. The paddle shift you see on Ferrari for example, is an Electronically controlled manual transmission. This is why they are incredible.

However no matter what you call it or who makes it, they all suck.

One of the best parts of driving is being able to control the car exactly the way you want to. Drivng a manual is a skill which some just use and others try to master. If you have ever driven a ferrari with the aluminium ball and gated shifter vs. a paddle you will understand.

Yes the paddle shifts may be faster but a stick is more fun. I drive for fun, until the race gods deam me worthy of a racing career, I will always drive a stick.

BTW: So will my wife. She also makes fun of auto drivers and people who can't drive in the snow.

[jdmfreak]

Well I hate to break it to you, but the days of the stick shift will be coming to an end.

[Goose93]

there will be sports cars with manual transmissions Honda, Nissan, Porsche and Audi are all companies that hold this belief dear. They all have manuals in there top line sports models. Some models are not even offered in autos.

Long live the clutch pedal!!!

[nametakennow]

BMW, and by saying Audi and Porsche you intend that the VW group... Heck, most automakers wouldn't be too terribly fond of letting go of the manuals, save American ones...

[Goose93]

In europe Auto are usually reserved for large vehicles and luxury sedans.

Everybody has to actually learn to drive. Not to mention that drivers ed is significantly more intense than the dumb little test we have in the US.

[1992Q45A]

I understand how a CVT works.. Audi uses it on their TT.. so let's not say audi hasn't put it into a "sporty car"

Also who says the CVT is in replacement of the manual.. From what I've read the CVT will be an option, with a 6 speed manual being the default transmission... Who cares if a CVT is allowed as an option, as long as it doesn't REPLACE the manual..

BMWs SMG gearbox puts the smack down on the Ferrari in terms of shifting speed..

The SMG puts race car tech in your hands.. dont' say it isn't pure or takes away from driving.. most every road racing series utilizes sequential gearboxes.. The CVT isn't an SMG.. I'm not sure if anyone is bashing on the SMG, but I thought I would defend it anyway

[Goose93]

I don't think the SMG is a true sequential but I might be wrong. You are also correct in that almost every "race" car is now using a electronicly controedl manual or a sequential.

But like I said in a pure-bred race car I can see the point. They are racing for a job. The goal is not to have fun but to win and make money. Efficiency counts. Also they use these types of trannys to prevent over revving the engine. All of this make sense.

But I am not driving to rational. Nothing I do to or in my car is rational. Owning my car is not rational. But I lot my car and that is enough for my wife to say yes.

My goal is having fun and enjoying the experience. I enjoy popping the revs into a corner with a little heal-toe action. It is much more pleasueable than tapping a paddle.

I have driven a couple of true paddle shift cars and they can be amazing but...

I think we left the concept of the thread by the way.

[1992Q45A]

The thread is over, but the discussion is gettin good.

Leave it to BMW to make something special out of a transmission. Its sequential manual gearbox has been officially named SMG, and it's a seriously high-tech piece. Like the Magneti-Marelli system employed by Ferrari, Maserati, and Aston-Martin, BMW's is an electrohydraulically managed six-speed manual. It, too, offers a fully automatic mode and easy-to-flick paddles on the steering column--in this application, they move with the wheel, so they're never out of reach. But it goes well beyond offering just a Sport mode. In fact, there are six distinct shifting maps. Every such notion needs an exclusive name, so BMW calls it Drivelogic.



The driver may select mode A1 (relaxed shifts, low-rpm upshift points, late downshifts) to A5 (fast, high-rpm shifts, and ultra-quick downshifts). We found A1 and A2 just too lazy for our tastes under almost all conditions. A3 is just right for normal driving, A4 ideal for spirited runs through the mountains, and A5 for playing non-virtual Granturismo3. And then there's A6, which amounts to full-commando upshifts that occur in 0.08 sec. Drivelogic also works when the trans is set for fully automatic operation. A handy dash icon reminds the driver which overall mode the transmission is in and which Drivelogic mode is selected.



The toughest aspect of driving our SMG-equipped M3 was getting a good launch at the track. Senior Road Test Editor Walton's notes were as follows: "Mash pedal to floor, prepare for wheelspin, revs climb to 4000, clutch drops, tires light, back out of throttle, tires slow, wheels begin to grip, almost bog, and off you go. Easy, huh?" That said, the system is superb in everyday use.



SMG costs $2400, cheap enough for the hardware and technology. As with any of these clutchless manual transmissions, some drivers like them and some don't. Those who want one will love BMW's SMG. BMW still offers a pure-as-gear-oil six-speed stick. The SMG is a good piece, and its purchaser can be satisfied that the only guys driving a BMW with a more sophisticated transmission are named Schumacher and Montoya.

They took the super launch out of the US versions, but you can supposedly have your BWM dealer reprogram the TCU to allow for the 4,000 RPM launch.

[1992Q45A]

CVTS are superior to convential automatics.. They shouldn't be put in replace of manual gear boxes, but I'm not sure that was ever the point. They are sportier, shift faster, more optimzed to the cars power band, and get better fuel economy then traditional slush boxes..

If you're going to have a slushbox may as well get the greatest slushbox available.

[chmercer]

if your going to have a slushbox you might as well buy a minivan instead of being a poser

if you see a gt3 and you look in the window to see a tiptronic, you think "f*****" (or at least you should).

and wtf is this?Quote »Stock vs stock, even a NA Z32 would crush a 240SX. Overall, 240SX's are garbage. Nissan castrated these S-series chassis models when they were sent to us, and left us with a decent looking shell, but a sub-average sports coupe. I'm sure the JDM tyte uber wannabe drifters would say otherwise, but with my experience of owning two 240SX's, and driving on both the KA24E and DE, and later making swaps in both, its easy for me to say that when the cars were stock they were not worth the driveway space they allocated[/quote]

if you are going to resort to childish namecalling, how bout thisz32 is an overweight car designed to cater to rich old men, and will forever sit in the shadow of the gtr. v6 motors are designed purley to fit in the engine bay next to the cruse control and a/c and other such garbage, as they use every counterweight engineering bandaid in the book to even function.msrp 1995 s14 base model 18099msrp 1995 z32 base model 36039hmm 18k worth of mods to get up to the price of a base model z, wonder how that race would play out. the initial build of a vehicle dosent show any car's potential AT ALL, features are always cut down to fit the correct price range for the market at the time. that is a poor choice of words to say it is a sub average sport coupe, bang for your buck a well kept s chassis is probably one of the funnest cars on the road.

i would be a bit more careful about how you word your posts as you come off quite pompous, to me anyhow.

[1992Q45A]

On a sports car, that is true. Many cars don't have the options of manuals, and would be better suited with a setup like the CVT.

I hope triptronic isn't an option on the GT3.. that is just wrong, being a race model and all.

[Goose93]

I knew they were good and I am impressed even more with a little education. That is very cool that they are using that technology in a production road car. I would probably still get the stick, but that is cool none the less.

Yeah, the CVT is the ultimate form of the automatic. In a vehicle like the Murano I loved it. Very smooth geat performance and the fuel savings were nice also. I still have reservations about performance under high loads and aggressive use. It is still a belt after all, and all belts will die.

I do understand that there will never be a production car ( that I can afford ) that is going to come with a dog-tooth sequential transmission.

But if any car designers are listening. I will not succumb to the automatic. They allow drivers to be lazy and any vehicle that can exceed 10mph, you should have to think before going faster. I would even be willing to negotiate and allow something like the SMG. This would require thought before moving and doesn't require people to develop hand-eye-foot co-ordination, but no Auto's. You should have to think while driving. If you can't do that get the hell off my pavement.

Driving is a right, not a privilage. It has to be earned.

[jdmfreak]

Sure...

Anyway I love the CVT in my moms 04 Murano. It did take some getting used to, but once that is over, it is pretty fun to drive.

[Goose93]

I bought my Z because I like those "crap" luxuries and I like to go fast around a track. What is wrong with having both. The fact that I have both is what makes the car so special.

Friday night I have a nice luxurious sports car that I can take my wife downtown, valet the car and fit right in with the exotics in the lot.

Saurday i can drive my car half way across the US to a track day and be very comfortable the whole way.

Sunday I race and keep up with many of the faster cars on the track.

Moday I can drive my car to work in stop and go traffic with the A/C on and all the comfort I could care for. I can also cut through traffic and have a little fun.

I compare my car with Cobras, Corvettes, Vipers, V8 Ferraris and Porches. When I look at my bang for the buck I am very happy. I have been in a couple of car shows and recieved just as many, "nice car", comments from exotic owners as I was giving. The last show I was in the Z club was driectly accross the isle from the Ferrari club.

The cars are on different levels. You will never hear me talk bad about the 240/silvias. I love they are great little cars that can be potent weapons. But they are still in diffent class of cars.

The Z32 <-> Skyline comparo is really a non issue. Let alone the fact that the previous Skylines never came to the US. Even in Japan they are not combatants but instead are diffent tools used for similar jobs by different styles of drivers. I have spoken to many Z owners in Japan and this is the image I have been given. Stock to stock I think the Z might even take a GTR on a road course. The GTR is not the supercar off the showroom lot that a lot people believe they are.

[1992Q45A]

The Z was Japans sports car for America.. Maybe it wasn't intended to be this in it's very first renditions, but it turned into this. That's why it's bigger then other Nissans.

The ZX has track proven performance.. Bashing on it's track capabilities is simple minded.

[1992Q45A]

As said earlier..

Go watch the SPEEDVISION CHALLENGE. This gives you a good idea how high hp performance cars stack up on the track.

Look who is beating all those lightweight precious sports cars.. A firebreating V8 CADDY.

[Goose93]

The series is called the Speed Channel SCCA World Challenge. these are not tube frame mock ups. The cars are very similar to showroom spec chassis, and are restricted per car to even the series between diffent makes and power plants. It's not a spec racer series.

Yeah I know what you mean the cts-v is incredible. But it does have a whole lot of imput from the Corvette LM program.

Still it proves that weight is only one part of the equation. Power is important. But the numbers that matter are power to weght ratio and power/torgue curve.

If these numbers are good then you can ususally make the rest work if you have a good base paltform to start with.

You can still have too much wieght and too much power also. If you start to get too big you will run iinto issues like tire wear and handling, also fuel economy. The current Audi Rs6's are running into these issues.

[keepingthe240]

Wow.. i should of taken notes of all the $%^ i read that some of you might of said in error(excluding goos93). And yeah..i have the specs of the '90 na 300zx. I'll look for it tonight. The sports car boom ended when your mom and dad bought there suv after watching those ads on tv (oh i feel like invencable..no body can stop me) and there kids couldn't fit in the back of the sport cars. Toyota gave up on the supra when people would rather spend $40k on the suv vs. a sports car <--direct quote from toyota !! The '93 supra was rather light folks..3,200+ lbs 320hp @ 11psi and 32ztt 3,500lb+ 300hp@9psi. ( I have the '96 buyer guide) Wow..i always thought nissan put the v6 in 'cause americans can't stand low tq @ low rpms. Which is why they didn't put the sr20 in the s13 in america. Off the line the v6 is king compared to the rb. And for every day...v6. How often do you go over 4k to put the rb as a better choice?? Hell..it would be a burger just to put a rb in the z. The station wagons of the '60s is the mini van of the '80s is the suv of the '90s-'00's. One body wants what their parents had. And the suv will soon pass!!http://www.nissanperformancema...40sx/ Here is a thread that points out how econo the 240 was built vs. the 300zx........When first sold in 1989 (and subsequently revised for the 1991 model year), the 240SX was considered to be an "economical sports car". Sporty, it was but to keep the price of the car low Nissan opted to cut cost in many aspects of the car. One of the areas where some costs were cut was in chassis assembly. In a no-compromise, high-end sports car, an auto maker would spare no expense in making the chassis as rigid as possible, as a stiff body would enable maximum performance and handling

[1992Q45A]

Yea, it's all a balancing act. The CTS Vs suspension was tested and further develped by one of the factory C5 drivers as well... None of this is a negative, and it's totally fair.. You can go out and buy this car today..

I want to see the Carrera GT show up on some tracks.. Car seems very impressive.. A race car in development, turned into a street car for sale.

Any of you guys driven a 914? You wish you had the weight when you approach triple digit speeds

[1992Q45A]

Wow.. i should of taken notes of all the $%^ i read that some of you might of said in error(excluding goos93). And yeah..i have the specs of the '90 na 300zx. I'll look for it tonight. The sports car boom ended when your mom and dad bought there suv after watching those ads on tv (oh i feel like invencable..no body can stop me) and there kids couldn't fit in the back of the sport cars. Toyota gave up on the supra when people would rather spend $40k on the suv vs. a sports car <--direct quote from toyota !! The '93 supra was rather light folks..3,200+ lbs 320hp @ 11psi and 32ztt 3,500lb+ 300hp@9psi. ( I have the '96 buyer guide) Wow..i always thought nissan put the v6 in 'cause americans can't stand low tq @ low rpms. Which is why they didn't put the sr20 in the s13 in america. Off the line the v6 is king compared to the rb. And for every day...v6. How often do you go over 4k to put the rb as a better choice?? Hell..it would be a burger just to put a rb in the z. The station wagons of the '60s is the mini van of the '80s is the suv of the '90s-'00's. One body wants what their parents had. And the suv will soon pass!!http://www.nissanperformancema...40sx/ Here is a thread that points out how econo the 240 was built vs. the 300zx........When first sold in 1989 (and subsequently revised for the 1991 model year), the 240SX was considered to be an "economical sports car". Sporty, it was but to keep the price of the car low Nissan opted to cut cost in many aspects of the car. One of the areas where some costs were cut was in chassis assembly. In a no-compromise, high-end sports car, an auto maker would spare no expense in making the chassis as rigid as possible, as a stiff body would enable maximum performance and handling

You're spot on.. The car didn't cost that much money because it had a Bose stereo

Right on about the supra as well. I forget which sport ute it was (I think RAV4) but they replaced the supra on the factory line to build more of one type of ute in paticular..

However, the Japanese should look to the success of the EVO and STI, and note that power will sell again. It needs to be in a somewhat economical package.. This is why the Z is a big seller.. Good performance/per dollar ratio.

Hell I just wish Toyota would have continued to make the supra, like honda does the NSX.. damn the expense, we build it to build it.

The RX7 needs to come back.. It needs the reliability and price of the RX8 and the character of the FD.