RE: Nissan 350Z GT-S: PH Heroes
Discussion
oceanview said:
blade7 said:
A 350Z makes a lot more sense to me than something like a 944 S2 that people are trying to knock out for 2 or 3 times the price.
Yes, but, you could say that about 60's Ferraris - they're dynamically crap- but sell for millions!A few years back when I was finally into sensible insurance quotes it was a tossup between this and an RX8, on paper it was the 350z as it had more power and sounded better but after an extended test drive I chose the RX8 as the 350z just seemed to push out wide understeer when pressing on, I assume a more aggressive ARB would solve this?
I'd probably take a gamble at 3k but 5k+ I can think of a few different Japanese cars I'd buy first.
I'd probably take a gamble at 3k but 5k+ I can think of a few different Japanese cars I'd buy first.
Stiffer ARB's do improve the turn in, but there are 2 more important factors at play (and I speak from experience, having improved my old Z over a four year period).
First up is the geometry, which is upset by the lack of rear camber adjustment - this becomes suboptimal the more you lower the car. A camber adjustment kit will easily resolve this for little outlay... If memory serves (we're talk +6 years ago) I settled on -3 Deg of camber for combined street use and 5-6 track days per year.
The thing that blew me away however was the car's sensitivity towards rubber choice. Many folk on the forum slated the original Bridgestones for their wooden feel, due to the very stiff sidewalls. I personally liked the Bridgestones however.
The previous owner of my car had fitted Avon ZZ's which were quite frankly lethal, causing the rear to step away under very little throttle and especially so in the wet. The Avons were rapidly binned!
I ran Falken 452's for a while which were more progressive (than the Avons) but suffered from a little sidewall roll/flex, which is easily mistaken for the understeer feel you are describing. You can adapt to this and drive around it.. Or drive another Z on different compounds if that's practical.
Personally I gel with Michelin Pilot Sport Cups above all else, but at this budget I think both Toyo and Falken are a good compromise with many happy punters on the Z forum.
As you probably gather I still have a soft spot for the 350z :-)
Matt
First up is the geometry, which is upset by the lack of rear camber adjustment - this becomes suboptimal the more you lower the car. A camber adjustment kit will easily resolve this for little outlay... If memory serves (we're talk +6 years ago) I settled on -3 Deg of camber for combined street use and 5-6 track days per year.
The thing that blew me away however was the car's sensitivity towards rubber choice. Many folk on the forum slated the original Bridgestones for their wooden feel, due to the very stiff sidewalls. I personally liked the Bridgestones however.
The previous owner of my car had fitted Avon ZZ's which were quite frankly lethal, causing the rear to step away under very little throttle and especially so in the wet. The Avons were rapidly binned!
I ran Falken 452's for a while which were more progressive (than the Avons) but suffered from a little sidewall roll/flex, which is easily mistaken for the understeer feel you are describing. You can adapt to this and drive around it.. Or drive another Z on different compounds if that's practical.
Personally I gel with Michelin Pilot Sport Cups above all else, but at this budget I think both Toyo and Falken are a good compromise with many happy punters on the Z forum.
As you probably gather I still have a soft spot for the 350z :-)
Matt
Posting as a long term 350Z owner...
However, I have Toyo T1Rs on the front, on the recommendation of many on the owners forum.
Big mistake. They're a budget tyre, which in itself wouldn't be a problem, but the sidewall are so soft that any driving pleasure or benefit that may be gained by the extra grip they provide over the Bridgestones is lost due to the lack of feel and precision through the steering and the soft turn-in, so I'm never inclined to exploit it.
996GT3_Matt said:
The thing that blew me away however was the car's sensitivity towards rubber choice. Many folk on the forum slated the original Bridgestones for their wooden feel, due to the very stiff sidewalls. I personally liked the Bridgestones however.
I liked the OEM Bridgestones (RE040) as well. However they could be a bit skittish in cold & wet conditions which, I believe, led to many 350Z drivers disliking them as they failed to adjust their driving style in such conditions.996GT3_Matt said:
Personally I gel with Michelin Pilot Sport Cups above all else, but at this budget I think both Toyo and Falken are a good compromise with many happy punters on the Z forum.
Matt
I currently have Michelin Pilot Super Sports on the rear of mine which are fine.Matt
However, I have Toyo T1Rs on the front, on the recommendation of many on the owners forum.
Big mistake. They're a budget tyre, which in itself wouldn't be a problem, but the sidewall are so soft that any driving pleasure or benefit that may be gained by the extra grip they provide over the Bridgestones is lost due to the lack of feel and precision through the steering and the soft turn-in, so I'm never inclined to exploit it.
Puddenchucker said:
Posting as a long term 350Z owner...
However, I have Toyo T1Rs on the front, on the recommendation of many on the owners forum.
Big mistake. They're a budget tyre, which in itself wouldn't be a problem, but the sidewall are so soft that any driving pleasure or benefit that may be gained by the extra grip they provide over the Bridgestones is lost due to the lack of feel and precision through the steering and the soft turn-in, so I'm never inclined to exploit it.
Good post! You’re spot on in the sense that the front axle is more sensitive than the rear when it comes to tyre choice. Poor tyre choice will sap confidence in the car quickly. 996GT3_Matt said:
The thing that blew me away however was the car's sensitivity towards rubber choice. Many folk on the forum slated the original Bridgestones for their wooden feel, due to the very stiff sidewalls. I personally liked the Bridgestones however.
I liked the OEM Bridgestones (RE040) as well. However they could be a bit skittish in cold & wet conditions which, I believe, led to many 350Z drivers disliking them as they failed to adjust their driving style in such conditions.996GT3_Matt said:
Personally I gel with Michelin Pilot Sport Cups above all else, but at this budget I think both Toyo and Falken are a good compromise with many happy punters on the Z forum.
Matt
I currently have Michelin Pilot Super Sports on the rear of mine which are fine.Matt
However, I have Toyo T1Rs on the front, on the recommendation of many on the owners forum.
Big mistake. They're a budget tyre, which in itself wouldn't be a problem, but the sidewall are so soft that any driving pleasure or benefit that may be gained by the extra grip they provide over the Bridgestones is lost due to the lack of feel and precision through the steering and the soft turn-in, so I'm never inclined to exploit it.
I personally found the rear very planted (and it was my first RWD car) but it will move and quickly... when provoked. Part of the charm IMO.
That's an interesting rarity for sure!
A few years ago I had a 350Z on my shortlist, but bought a different Z in the end - a BMW Z4 Coupe (ready to be flamed) but in the end it's looks were a major factor, plus I'd always had BMWs for about 10 years anyway!
But I do sometimes wonder if I should have had a test drive in a 350Z before I went for the BMW! (Set up nicely for "TameRacingDriver"!
I did test drive a GT86, and good as it was to drive it just didn't perform until you revved it's nuts off sadly.
A few years ago I had a 350Z on my shortlist, but bought a different Z in the end - a BMW Z4 Coupe (ready to be flamed) but in the end it's looks were a major factor, plus I'd always had BMWs for about 10 years anyway!
But I do sometimes wonder if I should have had a test drive in a 350Z before I went for the BMW! (Set up nicely for "TameRacingDriver"!
I did test drive a GT86, and good as it was to drive it just didn't perform until you revved it's nuts off sadly.
Loyly said:
The problem wasn't so much that weren't fast in an objective sense, they'd blow a shopping car into the weeds with ease. They didn't feel fast or satisfying, and that's half the problem. They should have been quicker, they're too heavy and the handling wasn't up to much. I like them enough but the drive they give is rather less than the sum of their parts.
They dont feel fast because they lack torque compared to forced induction engine most of us are used to even mapped with a load of bolt on's my 370z didint make as much torque as my 2.0 TSI Skoda despite making 100hp more and its torque that gives the sensation of power to the driver They need to be revved like the S2000 and GT86
liner33 said:
Loyly said:
The problem wasn't so much that weren't fast in an objective sense, they'd blow a shopping car into the weeds with ease. They didn't feel fast or satisfying, and that's half the problem. They should have been quicker, they're too heavy and the handling wasn't up to much. I like them enough but the drive they give is rather less than the sum of their parts.
They dont feel fast because they lack torque compared to forced induction engine most of us are used to even mapped with a load of bolt on's my 370z didint make as much torque as my 2.0 TSI Skoda despite making 100hp more and its torque that gives the sensation of power to the driver They need to be revved like the S2000 and GT86
liner33 said:
I'm aware they are GT cars, thats in the model name but 260ft lbs from almost a 4.0 engine is far from impressive in modern terms and thats why they dont feel as quick as other cars capable of similar 0-60 times
I wasn't saying you were not saying that (GT refers to the higher spec on some UK cars but having a "non GT" spec car doesn't make it a non GT style car!) - the engine was designed in 2002 so its not new, my 23 year old Celica is on par on power and torque because its FI, but as an NA car with 3.5 litres that was a pretty good return at the time of design. The Audi TT mark 1 V6 which was launched a year or so before had just 240ftlbs for example. The 3.0i Z4 of that time had a bit less. Having been in both they felt similar in power delivery and how fast they felt - I wouldnt say its a 350z trait more a trait of the engine style and power of the time for NAs. Of course in my Celica it feels quicker as you get the boost come on.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff