As I was getting my car checked out by the another mechanic today, a guy in a '00 GS400 drove up to get his brakes worked on. He checked out my stereo system and wanted my opinion on amps, subs, decks. So anyways, I took at look at his car and asked if I could have a ride. First thing I noticed was that the driver's seat is more comfortable than my '91 Q's. It had this plush feeling, very soft compared to the Q's. So soft in fact, I doubt it would be fun driving that thing hard around corners. But I suppose if you prefer that pampering feeling, the GS has your seats.

Second thing I noticed, too much wood. The steering wheel was wood grain as was the dash trim. Definitely not my style, I much prefer the Q's plain-jane business-like styling. Too many plastic pieces used on the dash as well, sorta Camry-ish. Overall, (trying real hard not to be biased here) but the Q's interior is MUCH better. It has this smooth, flowing theme. Our leather seats are so sleek-looking while the GS400 interior felt cluttered and the mid-dash obtrusive. The car is a bit smaller inside than I had expected. Also, the high-rear deck made me feel almost claustrophobic.

He didn't let me drive it so I rode shotgun instead. But the GS seems a bit quieter and smoother than the Q. The engine made a higher pitched grgle instead of the deep-toned grunt from our 4.5L's. It's obvious the car is well geared for 0-60 acceleration. I don't see a stock Q beating a GS400 from a stoplight drag, maybe from a roll or slightly modded things would be even.

Brakes....I can't really tell. I didn't get to drive the car so I can't speak for the brake feel. What I can say though is that I think the Q handles better for sure. There's more body roll and the G's chassis is easily upset by bigger bumps on the road. All in all, the Q fairs very well against a very good sporty sedan nearly a decade it's junior. I've always admired the GS and was really looking forward to jumping in one. Now that I have, it makes me appreciate my car all the more.

Thanks for the info. I pull along side them here n the DFW area and get looks all the time. And just had a 2000 alongside yesterday. Looked like he was wondering what to do next...:thumbup

aaa:

Dont you have the 4.11 in addition to your JWT?

Fred...

For a 90-93 Q to offer the same TOTAL gear ratio in 1st/2nd as a 98-02 LS/GS 400/430 the Q diff ratio would need to be around 4.75 so even the 4.083 leaves a lot on the table.So the STOCK old Q has 33% less gear multiplied rear wheel torque !

GM Caddy has suffered with the same 4 speed problem [balancing acceleration with highway MPG] for years in the STS [vs the SLS] and they went to a 3.70 diff ratio [in STS] to gain 4.5% more FW torque at the expense of loosing 1 MPG.......same with 97-01 Q they used 3.69 diff ratio to help make up for smaller displacement of 4.1 liters.Lexus went whole hog in 98 [in maximing 0-60 and quarter] but they had passing problems [55-75] thus the new 4.3 engine with just a little less gearing but a lower wider torque band and revised shift points.......notice the quarter mile time dropped in 02 [with a larger engine] but the car behaves much better in passing and is not as peaky.

The stock old Q holds its own against these in the critical 55- [75-80] high gear to 2nd downshift passing test because it doesn't have to shift in the middle.

Where does the 4.08 gear set come from (what application)? Does that car have the corresponding speed sensor?

I drove several of these in 2000 when I was looking to buy a car. The car moves, no doubt about that. My 97's engine sound is much closer to it than my Pop's 92 which to me sound closer to a detriot V8 (not complaining about that, I'm picking Pop's Q up at Thanksgiving and looking forward to it). The interior I felt was really a let down, but I did like the 5 speed gearing.

overall, the GS400 is a nice car, handles great and has all the features that you'd want. But one thing I couldn't get past is the styling...the thing no matter how hard I tried if friggin' ugly. The front is sorta of an E-Class benz knock-off, but the rear is ugly ugly ugly, IMHO.

I also drove 540i, 1997 and 1998 (I was looking in 2000). I was expecting to exit the car with my underware stained given how they talk about these in Car & Drive and Road & Track. You know what, I got out and was SOOO disapointed I cannot even begin to tell you.

In the end I had a 97' 540i with 40k I found for $46,000, a LS400 with 52kfor $43,000 and than I found my 97' Q45t for $24,000 (the previous owner had Lemoned it due to brake problem that was fixed). It wasn't even close, saving 20 grand I took the Q which is better looking than either of the other two, just a bit slower and less aggressive handling wise, but overall for saving 20k I'll take it.

You did good Jeff.

911/Q45: The 4.08's are in the 90-96 300ZX N/A. I am searching for the pumpkin (direct swap) from one as I type... Apparently they're scarce. Speed sensor from the donor car should match up... Dennis?

Lexus rear is ugly (not that I spend a lot of time behind them). No character.

AZhitman, do you have TCS? If not, you may not be able to swap the ZX (230?) differential in.

Sopdadope wrote:Second thing I noticed, too much wood. The steering wheel was wood grain as was the dash trim.

I really don't understand putting wood on the steering wheel. The last thing I want on a steering wheel is a hard slippery surface. That's one thing I definitely don't like about the 02+ Q.

Quote »It's obvious the car is well geared for 0-60 acceleration. I don't see a stock Q beating a GS400 from a stoplight drag, maybe from a roll or slightly modded things would be even. [/quote]

I don't think a stock first gen. Q will outrun a stock GS400 from a start or a roll. They run in the upper 90 mph range in the quarter mile compared to lower 90s for a stock Q. It's a lighter car with more horsepower and better gearing. The beauty of a 5 speed gearbox is that you can have your cake and eat it too with lower gearing off the line, but still have decent gearing for higher speeds.

Quote »Brakes....I can't really tell. I didn't get to drive the car so I can't speak for the brake feel. [/quote]

I'm not sure how good the stock brakes are relative to the Q, but one thing that is nice about GS400s is that Supra Turbo brakes bolt on, and they are the nicest factory brakes you can get this side of Porsche. Warpage is no longer an issue with rotors that big.

Quote »All in all, the Q fairs very well against a very good sporty sedan nearly a decade it's junior. I've always admired the GS and was really looking forward to jumping in one. Now that I have, it makes me appreciate my car all the more. [/quote]I thought about buying a GS400 before I got Q #2, and like them better overall, but couldn't justify paying 3X as much for a car that isn't that much better. It really is a credit to how good the original Q was that is matches up so favorably to a car that is 8 years newer.

No TCS. Should be a direct swap unless I hear otherwise.

Read Q45tech post at http://nicoclub.com/zerothread?id=1605&highlight=300ZX

It's amazing how this site has already gotten big enough, that some of our best links to good info links to some of our own threads.

Fred...