350Z-vs-MX5 Running Costs
Discussion
Mrs Otolith has a hankering for a new car. She wants to replace the MK2.5 MX-5 with something quicker. After due consideration of all the alternatives (including keeping the 5 and 'charging it), she fancies a 350Z coupe, and 12k-ish appears to buy her a 2005 model. Being a cautious and curmudgeonly old sod, I've made her work out in a spreadsheet what it's going to cost her per month in terms of running costs. My gut feeling is that they would be similar to our RX-8, but the two cars are used so differently that this isn't really helpful.
Biggest differences between the Z and 5 seem to be the cost of fuel and tyres - insurance and servicing seem much the same, as is tax for pre-2006 cars. Even the fuel consumption doesn't seem to be too ruinous (or, rather, the 5's 25mpg isn't terribly impressive). Even including adding 30% to the fuel bill, she's only looking at spending 50/month more on running it, a figure she seems happy she can afford.
Seems reasonable, any thoughts?
Biggest differences between the Z and 5 seem to be the cost of fuel and tyres - insurance and servicing seem much the same, as is tax for pre-2006 cars. Even the fuel consumption doesn't seem to be too ruinous (or, rather, the 5's 25mpg isn't terribly impressive). Even including adding 30% to the fuel bill, she's only looking at spending 50/month more on running it, a figure she seems happy she can afford.
Seems reasonable, any thoughts?
otolith said:
Mrs Otolith has a hankering for a new car. She wants to replace the MK2.5 MX-5 with something quicker. After due consideration of all the alternatives (including keeping the 5 and 'charging it), she fancies a 350Z coupe, and 12k-ish appears to buy her a 2005 model. Being a cautious and curmudgeonly old sod, I've made her work out in a spreadsheet what it's going to cost her per month in terms of running costs. My gut feeling is that they would be similar to our RX-8, but the two cars are used so differently that this isn't really helpful.
Biggest differences between the Z and 5 seem to be the cost of fuel and tyres - insurance and servicing seem much the same, as is tax for pre-2006 cars. Even the fuel consumption doesn't seem to be too ruinous (or, rather, the 5's 25mpg isn't terribly impressive). Even including adding 30% to the fuel bill, she's only looking at spending 50/month more on running it, a figure she seems happy she can afford.
Seems reasonable, any thoughts?
Supercharge/turbo the 5. Miles more fun than a 350Z.Biggest differences between the Z and 5 seem to be the cost of fuel and tyres - insurance and servicing seem much the same, as is tax for pre-2006 cars. Even the fuel consumption doesn't seem to be too ruinous (or, rather, the 5's 25mpg isn't terribly impressive). Even including adding 30% to the fuel bill, she's only looking at spending 50/month more on running it, a figure she seems happy she can afford.
Seems reasonable, any thoughts?
otolith said:
Seems reasonable, any thoughts?
Yes, seems reasonable. Your weighting of the fuel by 30% seems about right - I get 18mpg in town or short journeys, more like 24 on a run. It's supposed to be run on super, not that it makes too much difference to running costs.Rear tyres last about 10K miles. Fronts a bit more.
Brake pads & discs aren't very long lived - I got 15k miles out of the fronts on mine including 3 track days and a Walshy day. Pads aren't too expensive (£200 for all 4 corners) and are a doddle to fit yourself.
Some owners have had clutches fail around 30K miles, but others have lasted to 100K suggesting driving style plays a part.
There are various things which can go wrong with them, which could be costly if they happen out of warranty (as an '05 car would be). There are exhaustive lists on http://www.350z-uk.com and http://www.nissansportz.com if you have a poke about on the forums.
Puddenchucker said:
Tim S said:
Rear tyres last about 10K miles. Fronts a bit more.
I've had 20k out of mine, and there's still plenty of tread left, but the fronts have already been replaced due to the tyre 'feathering' problem.Which brand / type tyre have you got on your 'Z' ?
otolith said:
Biggest differences between the Z and 5 seem to be the cost of fuel and tyres - insurance and servicing seem much the same, as is tax for pre-2006 cars. Even the fuel consumption doesn't seem to be too ruinous (or, rather, the 5's 25mpg isn't terribly impressive). Even including adding 30% to the fuel bill, she's only looking at spending 50/month more on running it, a figure she seems happy she can afford.
Seems reasonable, any thoughts?
Insurance for our 08' 313 'Z' was cheaper than the 'S2000' @ £386 fully comp.Seems reasonable, any thoughts?
Fuel economy 18 mpg worse so far commute to work, driven quickly or around town, computer did show 9mpg at one time. I didn't beleive it, so a quick press of the reset button on the dash makes you feel better.
Open road or motorway it's easy to achieve 27 mpg on a long run.
Huge noticeable difference in performance between the 350Z and the MX5. Unleash the fun.....
cramman said:
Just out of curiosity, have you considered and ruled out the S2000 and Z4 (probs 3.0) optoions.
S2000 is the standby option if she doesn't like how the Z drives. Z4 she doesn't fancy. 12k Boxster S dubious. Monaro a bit on the juicy side. Celica FWD. Teg too rice. Megane R26 too ordinary, didn't fancy any other hot hatches. Can't remember what else was on her long list, but it was fairly long. Qube said:
Puddenchucker said:
Tim S said:
Rear tyres last about 10K miles. Fronts a bit more.
I've had 20k out of mine, and there's still plenty of tread left, but the fronts have already been replaced due to the tyre 'feathering' problem.Which brand / type tyre have you got on your 'Z' ?
Qube said:
otolith said:
Biggest differences between the Z and 5 seem to be the cost of fuel and tyres - insurance and servicing seem much the same, as is tax for pre-2006 cars. Even the fuel consumption doesn't seem to be too ruinous (or, rather, the 5's 25mpg isn't terribly impressive). Even including adding 30% to the fuel bill, she's only looking at spending 50/month more on running it, a figure she seems happy she can afford.
Seems reasonable, any thoughts?
Insurance for our 08' 313 'Z' was cheaper than the 'S2000' @ £386 fully comp.Seems reasonable, any thoughts?
Fuel economy 18 mpg worse so far commute to work, driven quickly or around town, computer did show 9mpg at one time. I didn't beleive it, so a quick press of the reset button on the dash makes you feel better.
Open road or motorway it's easy to achieve 27 mpg on a long run.
Huge noticeable difference in performance between the 350Z and the MX5. Unleash the fun.....
My 2004 is 'cheap' to tax aswell.
Love mine, but it will be up for sale after its service next week. Will be sad to see it go.
The 2005 model year 350Z will have the original he-man steering system on it which your wife may not like. This was changed in the March 06 onwards model, which also got the 296bhp engine upgrade that was previously only offered on the GT4 limited edition model.
Just something to consider if she finds a 2005MY Zed's steering a bit hefty.
Just something to consider if she finds a 2005MY Zed's steering a bit hefty.
Silver Pellet said:
The 2005 model year 350Z will have the original he-man steering system on it which your wife may not like. This was changed in the March 06 onwards model, which also got the 296bhp engine upgrade that was previously only offered on the GT4 limited edition model.
Just something to consider if she finds a 2005MY Zed's steering a bit hefty.
Mine's a March 2006 pre-facelift one (one of the last MY03) and I don't think the steering's very heavy. Far lighter than my non-PAS P reg Micra at any rate.Just something to consider if she finds a 2005MY Zed's steering a bit hefty.
Early ones were criticised for having a heavy clutch too but mine's fairly light, which makes me think some of the improvements might have filtered through before the first face-and-engine-lift. I've never driven another one though so have no idea if this is true.
otolith said:
cramman said:
Just out of curiosity, have you considered and ruled out the S2000 and Z4 (probs 3.0) optoions.
S2000 is the standby option if she doesn't like how the Z drives. Z4 she doesn't fancy. 12k Boxster S dubious. Monaro a bit on the juicy side. Celica FWD. Teg too rice. Megane R26 too ordinary, didn't fancy any other hot hatches. Can't remember what else was on her long list, but it was fairly long. I'd still choose the 350Z over the Monaro if I didn't have kids.
sparkyhx said:
if your thinking of the monaro you could always LPG it. I bet the Monaro is not much different to the 350z petrol wise. huge lazy engine.
I think she'd consider that if it was what she really wanted and it was only the fuel consumption holding her back, but she's not that excited about the Monaro. On the official figures, though, the Monaro should be about 40% more juicy again than the Z.austin2ndcity said:
don't know what your driving is like but ive had my 350z now for a month and it gets 30-34 on a steady motorway run and 24-27 around town and i aint driving miss daisy !!
What type of speeds, traffic and how long are the commutes to give you figures of 24 - 27 around town. My 08' is twin induction whether this makes a difference I don't know. I average around 18 - 21 on commuting combined with 27+ mpg on the motorway.. maybe my car hasn't run in yet.. I was only getting 28 - 30 mpg in my S2000... Are you sure your trip computer is accurate ??Message Board | Japanese Chat | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff