Time we had pictures of everyones Japanese wagons

[MightyBadger]

I miss my last three jap sheds

[Salem cat]

Jim on the hill said:

Salem cat said:

Here’s my Infiniti Q60S
I’ve had it just over 4 years now, and I’m still loving it

Edited by Salem cat on Saturday 13th January 14:31

What are they like inside? Much prefer the idea of an Infinity to a BMW.

Its really nice on the inside, got all the whistles and bells (except Apple car play or the android equivalent), it’s very comfortable and quiet, it’s probably not as modern looking as the BMW’s, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

[Alias218]

hedges88 said:

Alias218 said:

2007 350Z with the later VQ35HR engine. Mine for 10 years and turning 17 in June!

Most or all criticism I heard most of, was the engine sounding underwhelming and also not feeling all that sporty for it's segment. Not feeling as fast as the on paper figures was another

So I don't spend another night past midnight on the PC, I wont Wikipedia and just ask someone with the best answer, what's the later motor like? Does it address the complaints about the first unit in any way?

I don't like the looks of a 350z though don't get me wrong it's a far superior machine to my motors in many ways but that shape of car just don't do it for me. I like the Infiniti G35 from the back but those buggy headlights are off-putting. Front end from the 350z and the G35 arse seems like an attractive motor.

Are these also the same as those USDM? Skyline coupe jobs as well?

The older cars, those before 2006, and then those between 2006-2007, have the earlier VQ35DE and VQ35DE Rev-up. The earliest cars only spin up to 6500rpm, so can feel breathless though they are a little torquier then the HRs. I’ve never driven one, but I hear they are a bit underwhelming so you’re not the first to say as much.

The HR, in my experience, loves to rev, and I will take it up to its 7500rpm redline without hesitation. By all accounts a different engine in character. The HR has 80% different components to the earlier DEs. The bonnet hump for instance, isn’t due to pure aesthetics, it’s actually because the block is taller due to longer rods to reduce piston side loads to enable the higher rev limit. It’s quite a different engine. It’s not for no reason that HR engined cars command a premium over DE engined cars.

The lack of perceived progress I think is due to the gearing - they’ll do 70mph in second so very long. This can be remedied by changing the final drive from 3.538 to 3.9 or even higher. Of course, you’ll lose some top speed from that but they’re limited to 155mph and head north of 170mph if removed so I think you’d be unlikely to notice. I’m not sure what the top speed would be on a 3.9 FD. But they’re still quick - low 5s to 62mph and 13s quarters if you’re fleet footed. They’ll keep up with an E46 M3 (my friend had one so I know this first hand!).

So far as I’m aware the Skyline 350GT/G35/350Z are mechanically identical (amongst similar powertrains) with the top hat being the significant difference. You might even be able to swap a 350Z front to the G35!

I hear a few people saying they don’t like the rear, but I think it looks great! Wide and purposeful:



Edit: I looked and you can convert a G35 front to 350Z. It’s not a looker.

Edited by Alias218 on Saturday 13th January 22:09

[hedges88]

Alias218 said:

hedges88 said:

Alias218 said:

2007 350Z with the later VQ35HR engine. Mine for 10 years and turning 17 in June!

Most or all criticism I heard most of, was the engine sounding underwhelming and also not feeling all that sporty for it's segment. Not feeling as fast as the on paper figures was another

So I don't spend another night past midnight on the PC, I wont Wikipedia and just ask someone with the best answer, what's the later motor like? Does it address the complaints about the first unit in any way?

I don't like the looks of a 350z though don't get me wrong it's a far superior machine to my motors in many ways but that shape of car just don't do it for me. I like the Infiniti G35 from the back but those buggy headlights are off-putting. Front end from the 350z and the G35 arse seems like an attractive motor.

Are these also the same as those USDM? Skyline coupe jobs as well?

The older cars, those before 2006, and then those between 2006-2007, have the earlier VQ35DE and VQ35DE Rev-up. The earliest cars only spin up to 6500rpm, so can feel breathless though they are a little torquier then the HRs. I’ve never driven one, but I hear they are a bit underwhelming so you’re not the first to say as much.

The HR, in my experience, loves to rev, and I will take it up to its 7500rpm redline without hesitation. By all accounts a different engine in character. The HR has 80% different components to the earlier DEs. The bonnet hump for instance, isn’t due to pure aesthetics, it’s actually because the block is taller due to longer rods to reduce piston side loads to enable the higher rev limit. It’s quite a different engine. It’s not for no reason that HR engined cars command a premium over DE engined cars.

The lack of perceived progress I think is due to the gearing - they’ll do 70mph in second so very long. This can be remedied by changing the final drive from 3.538 to 3.9 or even higher. Of course, you’ll lose some top speed from that but they’re limited to 155mph and head north of 170mph if removed so I think you’d be unlikely to notice. I’m not sure what the top speed would be on a 3.9 FD. But they’re still quick - low 5s to 62mph and 13s quarters if you’re fleet footed. They’ll keep up with an E46 M3 (my friend had one so I know this first hand!).

So far as I’m aware the Skyline 350GT/G35/350Z are mechanically identical (amongst similar powertrains) with the top hat being the significant difference. You might even be able to swap a 350Z front to the G35!

I hear a few people saying they don’t like the rear, but I think it looks great! Wide and purposeful:



Edit: I looked and you can convert a G35 front to 350Z. It’s not a looker.

Edited by Alias218 on Saturday 13th January 22:09

Ah, I understand perfectly. If I was buying a sports car like that I would expect a quick to respond, willing engine with shorter and close gearing but sounds like that was missing. No doubt emissions and MPG figures being chased. Sounds like they really made an effort to make it better. Any engine with the code HR for "high revolution" is going to make petrolheads interested! I would hazard a guess that the previous revision engine would suit the 5 speed auto better. I think it's those USDM style markers that put me off the rear a bit of the 350z. Sounds like a decent performer for an N/A V6 of that size with either motor

I had no idea they had replaced the 370z as I have not been as interested in new cars for a while now. Now I've seen THIS I may pay more attention!

[GravelBen]

A lot of the criticism I've heard/read of the 350Z is to do with its size/weight and people finding it more of a GT or muscle-car in character when they expected a sportscar. But its predecessor the 300ZX was similar, so that shouldn't be a surprise really. I haven't driven one for an informed opinion, but as a passenger they do feel like quite a big car (especially when you've just jumped out of an MX5!).

[Konan]

Got some nostalgia going on for my old wally-wagon.

[Alias218]

hedges88 said:

Alias218 said:

hedges88 said:

Alias218 said:

2007 350Z with the later VQ35HR engine. Mine for 10 years and turning 17 in June!

Most or all criticism I heard most of, was the engine sounding underwhelming and also not feeling all that sporty for it's segment. Not feeling as fast as the on paper figures was another

So I don't spend another night past midnight on the PC, I wont Wikipedia and just ask someone with the best answer, what's the later motor like? Does it address the complaints about the first unit in any way?

I don't like the looks of a 350z though don't get me wrong it's a far superior machine to my motors in many ways but that shape of car just don't do it for me. I like the Infiniti G35 from the back but those buggy headlights are off-putting. Front end from the 350z and the G35 arse seems like an attractive motor.

Are these also the same as those USDM? Skyline coupe jobs as well?

The older cars, those before 2006, and then those between 2006-2007, have the earlier VQ35DE and VQ35DE Rev-up. The earliest cars only spin up to 6500rpm, so can feel breathless though they are a little torquier then the HRs. I’ve never driven one, but I hear they are a bit underwhelming so you’re not the first to say as much.

The HR, in my experience, loves to rev, and I will take it up to its 7500rpm redline without hesitation. By all accounts a different engine in character. The HR has 80% different components to the earlier DEs. The bonnet hump for instance, isn’t due to pure aesthetics, it’s actually because the block is taller due to longer rods to reduce piston side loads to enable the higher rev limit. It’s quite a different engine. It’s not for no reason that HR engined cars command a premium over DE engined cars.

The lack of perceived progress I think is due to the gearing - they’ll do 70mph in second so very long. This can be remedied by changing the final drive from 3.538 to 3.9 or even higher. Of course, you’ll lose some top speed from that but they’re limited to 155mph and head north of 170mph if removed so I think you’d be unlikely to notice. I’m not sure what the top speed would be on a 3.9 FD. But they’re still quick - low 5s to 62mph and 13s quarters if you’re fleet footed. They’ll keep up with an E46 M3 (my friend had one so I know this first hand!).

So far as I’m aware the Skyline 350GT/G35/350Z are mechanically identical (amongst similar powertrains) with the top hat being the significant difference. You might even be able to swap a 350Z front to the G35!

I hear a few people saying they don’t like the rear, but I think it looks great! Wide and purposeful:



Edit: I looked and you can convert a G35 front to 350Z. It’s not a looker.

Edited by Alias218 on Saturday 13th January 22:09

Ah, I understand perfectly. If I was buying a sports car like that I would expect a quick to respond, willing engine with shorter and close gearing but sounds like that was missing. No doubt emissions and MPG figures being chased. Sounds like they really made an effort to make it better. Any engine with the code HR for "high revolution" is going to make petrolheads interested! I would hazard a guess that the previous revision engine would suit the 5 speed auto better. I think it's those USDM style markers that put me off the rear a bit of the 350z. Sounds like a decent performer for an N/A V6 of that size with either motor

I had no idea they had replaced the 370z as I have not been as interested in new cars for a while now. Now I've seen THIS I may pay more attention!

The long gearing takes out some of the urgency I guess. I quite like it as you can really make the most of the exhaust taking the car right up through the gears. As I say, a different final drive puts some of that urgency back in, as does a single mass flywheel. The new Z unfortunately isn’t coming to the UK, so they’ll have to be imports from Japan for RHD.

GravelBen said:

A lot of the criticism I've heard/read of the 350Z is to do with its size/weight and people finding it more of a GT or muscle-car in character when they expected a sportscar. But its predecessor the 300ZX was similar, so that shouldn't be a surprise really. I haven't driven one for an informed opinion, but as a passenger they do feel like quite a big car (especially when you've just jumped out of an MX5!).

I’ve always said this, but the size and weight really aren’t a thing. Size wise, they aren’t very large cars (though larger than an MX-5!) Weight wise, they aren’t much more than the E46 M3 I always make comparisons with - both just either side of 1500kg. They’re not sports cars though, they’re GTs. Hence why they were offered with the GT pack which most UK cars have. You can make them sports cars with choice modifications but off the shelf they are for munching miles in comfort and speed - which they do very well. Think of it as a very budget AM Vantage!

[GravelBen]

Alias218 said:

Think of it as a very budget AM Vantage!

I think of them more as a Japanese Mustang!

[Jim on the hill]

GravelBen said:

Alias218 said:

Think of it as a very budget AM Vantage!

I think of them more as a Japanese Mustang!

Definitely not a Muscle car, they are civilised and a GT.

[crispyshark]

My Japanese Hearse….😂

[Jim on the hill]

crispyshark said:

My Japanese Hearse….??

One of the most perfect cars ever made imo

[crispyshark]

Jim on the hill said:

crispyshark said:

My Japanese Hearse….??

One of the most perfect cars ever made imo

They are certainly unique....i think the looks improve with age tbh....its a great example of Jap whackiness of a bygone era at its best.

Also very hard to move to another car that gives me what the foz does....will prob end up being buried in the thing!

[giblet]

Axeboy said:

Looks great, I've had 3 Vr4's a long time ago, absolutely loved them.

+1

I also owned 3 over the years, all “official import” Ralliart saloons in various states of tune.

The 3rd one I had converted to LPG by a fellow CVR4 forum member (side note I remember your username from there) and it was a great all rounder. I’d happily buy a facelift Legnum VR4 in Trigger Mauve if one came up for sale at the right price, really miss them. A nice left field car with good performance for the time

[horsemeatscandal]

Somehow only just discovered this thread. Some very nice stuff here, that grey R32 a few pages back is just peak car. Here's my contribution:



Owned it since May last year and spent a fair bit on it already; some voluntarily, some not so much. More money will be spent as the list continues to grow. It's a lovely thing to cruise around in.

[Tango13]

Alias218 said:

I’ve always said this, but the size and weight really aren’t a thing. Size wise, they aren’t very large cars (though larger than an MX-5!) Weight wise, they aren’t much more than the E46 M3 I always make comparisons with - both just either side of 1500kg. They’re not sports cars though, they’re GTs. Hence why they were offered with the GT pack which most UK cars have. You can make them sports cars with choice modifications but off the shelf they are for munching miles in comfort and speed - which they do very well. Think of it as a very budget AM Vantage!

As I've posted before, 600 miles in a day isn't a problem. The tall gearing helps with the fuel consumption and unlike my previous M car I don't need to carry a couple of litres of 10w60 in the boot.

Heated washers jets would be nice though.

[Alias218]

Tango13 said:

Alias218 said:

I’ve always said this, but the size and weight really aren’t a thing. Size wise, they aren’t very large cars (though larger than an MX-5!) Weight wise, they aren’t much more than the E46 M3 I always make comparisons with - both just either side of 1500kg. They’re not sports cars though, they’re GTs. Hence why they were offered with the GT pack which most UK cars have. You can make them sports cars with choice modifications but off the shelf they are for munching miles in comfort and speed - which they do very well. Think of it as a very budget AM Vantage!

As I've posted before, 600 miles in a day isn't a problem. The tall gearing helps with the fuel consumption and unlike my previous M car I don't need to carry a couple of litres of 10w60 in the boot.

Heated washers jets would be nice though.

I’ve driven to the Nurburgring a couple of times, and it did it with ease. I’ve driven some cars where my back is hurting after 45 minutes but the Zed is just so comfy! It’ll swallow up miles with no problem. Then, when the limit is lifted on derestricted sections of autobahn, it’ll sit at three figures quite happily too.

[Baggie austin]

[hedges88]

Baggie austin said:

Skipping over the awesome Subaru by habit, that EVO 6 is gorgeous. I can just imagine standing near that cloud and hear the lovely tickover sound. As someone who has both, if you had to get rid of one which would you choose?

Is there anything that you like more on one or the other?

If I were to ever be lucky enough to have an Evo, it would be a VII GTA for me for sure. I kind of preferred the fog light front bumper of the 5, but I guess it had to grow up a bit

[Baggie austin]

hedges88 said:

Skipping over the awesome Subaru by habit, that EVO 6 is gorgeous. I can just imagine standing near that cloud and hear the lovely tickover sound. As someone who has both, if you had to get rid of one which would you choose?

Is there anything that you like more on one or the other?

If I were to ever be lucky enough to have an Evo, it would be a VII GTA for me for sure. I kind of preferred the fog light front bumper of the 5, but I guess it had to grow up a bit

Thanks for the kind comments
I daily my scoobie and for me it wins on sound. I constantly change my mind about which one I prefer the look of, think the evo is better from side, scoobie the front and rear.

Evo is the better performance drive, both are built, the scoobie is 505bhp but is very dailyable
The evo is pure obscene power, 678bhp at only 1.4 bar, it's got a stupidly heavy clutch, and is a challenging drive, no air con and you stink of petrol, but what a weapon





[url]

|https://thumbsnap.com/c5ntL7Um[/url]

[pti]

Waiting for spring so I can get the MX5 back on the road. I didn't even get round to MOTing it last year as we were moving house and had a (relatively) new baby. I like Japanese cars and I like turbos.



Said new house also came with my first ever garage! Sadly, it's really only suitable for storing the MX5. Literally:





Contender for the worst garage on Pistonheads, potentially.

That said, there's something reassuring knowing it's now parked on my property rather than (as with a couple of my previous "toys") parked in a damp, powerless council garage across town.