RE: NISMO 370Z Roadster concept revealed

[MisterF]

Still prefer the Boxster, but I'm also biased towards italian food & jap electrickery.

Edited by MisterF on Saturday 14th February 11:07

[angelicupstarts]

soad said:

stephen300o said:

It looks just a touch horrific.

I agree.

and I , especially rare quarter view

[angelicupstarts]

elementad said:

stephen300o said:

elementad said:

Makes me laugh jibes about the weight and "fairly capable". The coupe weights similar to an M3 and coupe lapped quicker than m135i, m235i, new golf r on autocars lap test by well over a second.
Those have been described in slightly better lights than "fairly capable" and "chubster".
Strange but true.

Imagine a two seater sports car should weigh a bit less than a four seater repmobile..

I thought the M3 was the last word in sporting motoring around here. F type (2 seater sports GT) weights the same also.

Im no great fan of the M3 , but it is a devastating machine
5 seats , the older generation 2003 car is faster then the 350z .. weight is a fraction less on bmw
the nismo is heavier by 37 kg ..for a 2 seater ? same speed as older m3 , of course new m3 is faster again
much easier everyday to live with and would hammer most cars in the real world ....old m3 around £7000 for one in good nick .....
once again not a great fan , but hard to think of something better
as for the nissan well ...its an almost car .. has some charms , but in that market bmw z coupes , porsche caymans , even audi tt ...

[adeelster]

Really love the look of the Nismo. The problem is that the car it's based on just isn't that great.

I had a 370z roadster manual for a year and really tried to love it (really really tried!) but the chassis just wasn't engaging enough. Combine that with a v6 that sounds pretty rough with no encouragement to rev it out and that's not great for a sports car.

On the plus side it was comfortable and 100% reliable. And I thought it looked the business in black.

[angelicupstarts]

actually the thing that i don't understand ( someone might help ) is that the standard car is around 5.2 sec to 60mph , i think some of the early ones were even 5 to 5.1 ... the nismo in production is 5 sec , so not faster at all ?
top speed is the same at 155 mph , nismo weighs 40 kg more then standard .
so where is it better ?????
can't see how it would handle better with extra weight and no gains on speed ? anyone ?

[liner33]

Nismo is just a series of subtle performance and styling upgrades over the standard z . Different exhaust , wheels tyres, map giving extra 14 or so hp , suspension upgrades . It's hardly a massive leap over the stock car but it's up to individual as to whether it's worth the money.

[elementad]

angelicupstarts said:

elementad said:

stephen300o said:

elementad said:

Makes me laugh jibes about the weight and "fairly capable". The coupe weights similar to an M3 and coupe lapped quicker than m135i, m235i, new golf r on autocars lap test by well over a second.
Those have been described in slightly better lights than "fairly capable" and "chubster".
Strange but true.

Imagine a two seater sports car should weigh a bit less than a four seater repmobile..

I thought the M3 was the last word in sporting motoring around here. F type (2 seater sports GT) weights the same also.

Im no great fan of the M3 , but it is a devastating machine
5 seats , the older generation 2003 car is faster then the 350z .. weight is a fraction less on bmw
the nismo is heavier by 37 kg ..for a 2 seater ? same speed as older m3 , of course new m3 is faster again
much easier everyday to live with and would hammer most cars in the real world ....old m3 around £7000 for one in good nick .....
once again not a great fan , but hard to think of something better
as for the nissan well ...its an almost car .. has some charms , but in that market bmw z coupes , porsche caymans , even audi tt ...

You COULD compare performance to an M3 (as I was only talking about weight - and nobody complains about the m3 on here) but then you would have to consider that the M3 costs much more and as a consequence depreciation is far worse on the BMW than the Nissan whichever way you look at it.

Your opinion on it being an "almost car" is interesting - if you have extensive experience of one - or perhaps it's the result of echoing what you have heard? I don't know.

From those cars you list and from a 'drivers car' perspective numerous reviews from respectable journalists have placed even the standard 370z above the z4's and the TTs. Just the Porsche which is the better of them all.
Top Gear magazine: "the TT will crush it in sales but the (370) Z is the better drivers car".

[angelicupstarts]

elementad said:

angelicupstarts said:

elementad said:

stephen300o said:

elementad said:

Makes me laugh jibes about the weight and "fairly capable". The coupe weights similar to an M3 and coupe lapped quicker than m135i, m235i, new golf r on autocars lap test by well over a second.
Those have been described in slightly better lights than "fairly capable" and "chubster".
Strange but true.

Imagine a two seater sports car should weigh a bit less than a four seater repmobile..

I thought the M3 was the last word in sporting motoring around here. F type (2 seater sports GT) weights the same also.

Im no great fan of the M3 , but it is a devastating machine
5 seats , the older generation 2003 car is faster then the 350z .. weight is a fraction less on bmw
the nismo is heavier by 37 kg ..for a 2 seater ? same speed as older m3 , of course new m3 is faster again
much easier everyday to live with and would hammer most cars in the real world ....old m3 around £7000 for one in good nick .....
once again not a great fan , but hard to think of something better
as for the nissan well ...its an almost car .. has some charms , but in that market bmw z coupes , porsche caymans , even audi tt ...

You COULD compare performance to an M3 (as I was only talking about weight - and nobody complains about the m3 on here) but then you would have to consider that the M3 costs much more and as a consequence depreciation is far worse on the BMW than the Nissan whichever way you look at it.

Your opinion on it being an "almost car" is interesting - if you have extensive experience of one - or perhaps it's the result of echoing what you have heard? I don't know.

From those cars you list and from a 'drivers car' perspective numerous reviews from respectable journalists have placed even the standard 370z above the z4's and the TTs. Just the Porsche which is the better of them all.
Top Gear magazine: "the TT will crush it in sales but the (370) Z is the better drivers car".

i agree with most of what you say ...
i don't quite understand why the nismo is 1535 kg ...it obviously effects its speed as is really no faster to standard car .
and previous generation m3 was lighter for a 5 seater ???
ive driven one a couple of times and admit it has character ... but falls just short of being great .
i do not think much of the audi tt or z4 coupe either , but they manage to pull off the solid feeling and a more mature design that i felt the 370 was missing thus more people will buy them
maybe i was unfair calling it an almost car ..i think what i meant it falls short of something really good , that its so close to being .

[daytona365]

With cars like this available for prices that mere mortals can aspire to, who needs those 6 & 700 hp half million quid freak shows ?....The one reservation is how do these ride the rutted British roads now ? Apparently the older ones had an uncomfortably harsh ride ?

[Kaj91]

Have to say I like that and I wouldn't normally be a fan of anything from Nissan, even the GT-R. Would still prefer a Boxster, but I am sure there will be a big price difference.