So, Edmunds just got around to testing the new Nissan 370Z, take a look:

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=136547/pageId=154142

Cliff notes for those who care:

What Works:
Responsive, powerful V6; tenacious cornering grip; supple highway ride; good driving position.

What Needs Work:
Engine vibration at peak rpm; massive right-rear blind spot; nighttime instrument reflections in windshield.

Bottom Line:
A world-class sports car for the price of a Mitsubishi Evo or Subaru WRX STI.

Conditions for Testing
Temperature (Fahrenheit): 80.6 (fairly warm outside)
Humidity: 16.4%
Elevation (ft): 1,121 (not exactly sea level)

0 - 60 (sec): 5.1

1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 13.4 @ 104.6 (Look at the trap speed!)

0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 4.9

60 - 0 (ft): 101

Braking Rating (Excellent, Good, Average, Poor or Very Poor): Excellent

Slalom (mph): 69.8

Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.97 (Awesome grip!!)

Handling Rating (Excellent, Good, Average, Poor or Very Poor): Excellent


^^^For reference, Edmunds has a fairly slow track, at over 1100 ft altitude, not exactly sea level. This also was not a base model (read: slightly heavier). I'll be willing to bet once this car hits the streets, some of the east coast guys (read: 93-94 octane & sea level) will be trapping over 107+mph. Basically, at sea level, just add a set of drag radials, and this is a high 12 second car. Although it's obviously not a drag car, as 0.97g on the skidpad, in a production RWD car on street tires, starting under $30k is just nuts!

For the record, I'm impressed by what Nissan has done with the Z, they did a great job IMO. Although, I'm disappointed by the new EVO & STI. The last gen cars, the EVO & STI would wipe the floor with the 350Z.... then Subaru & Mitsubishi decided to "tame" the EVO & STI, making them slower than the outgoing versions, and all the while Nissan was making the Z more of a hardcore performance car than the outgoing model! Hats off to Nissan.

Motor Trend also, just tested the new 370Z:

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/112_0902_2009_nissan_370z_first_test/index.html

They found the following acceleration numbers:
0-60 - 4.7
1/4 - 13.3 @ 105.7
Skidpad - 0.99g (holy shit! That's sticking to the road!)

^^^I guarantee, at sea level, on a cool day, people will be running high 12's with nothing more than a set of drag radials. I'm kind of curious to see how they stack up at our altitude... might have to go take a test drive and see how it compares to my old 350Z

nice. Def improvement. Doesn't look like the MS3 will have as much fun with the new Z

mOOsE wrote:nice. Def improvement. Doesn't look like the MS3 will have as much fun with the new Z

Maybe... although, we're at 5200 ft altitude here, which will level the playing field at least for the turbo guys up here.

As a general rule of thumb, for each 1000ft altitude you go up, an N/A car loses about 4% power, whereas F/I cars only lose about 2.43% IIRC.

So, while the N/A 370Z would be losing about 20% power up here (dropping it to about 266bhp at altitude), a MS3 should only lose around 12% power up here (dropping it to about 232bhp up here by it's current 263bhp rating), couple that with the fact that the MS3 weighs anywhere from 100-200 lbs less than the 370Z, and it becomes a fairly close race up here.

Although, there's one thing that gives the MS3 an edge no matter what altitude you're at- it's equipped with a turbocharger from the factory. Which will potentially mean 2 things:

1. Dollar for dollar, it's almost always cheaper to get horsepower out of a turbo car vs an NA car. It's as easy as turning up the boost. Typically, to even out the dollar/horsepower per mod ratio, the NA car will have to resort to some form of forced induction (turbocharger(s), supercharger or nitrous), and typically, turbo/supercharging isn't cheap on cars like the Z... although, nitrous on the other hand, as long as they don't mind refilling the bottle every once and a while, can be a good way to even the playing field, but let's be honest, how many people really run & use nitrous on their daily driven street cars? Not a whole lot I would imagine.

2. It may not make the same peak horsepower figures as the larger Z motor, but will likely trounce it handily in mid-range torque. This will become especially true when you start modding. It's not too tough on a modern day turbo car to gain close to 100 ft-lbs of torque with bolt-ons & tuning... an NA car can't say the same.

Just food for thought

Excellent info Brandon. Thanks for the write-up, I was very curious on the performance of the new 370. I do think it looks a bit too much like the 350, but I still like it. Unfortunately, I cannot roll with the RWD in this climate (as Sunday proved during my 8 hour drive from Breckenridge).

Rich wrote:Excellent info Brandon. Thanks for the write-up, I was very curious on the performance of the new 370. I do think it looks a bit too much like the 350, but I still like it. Unfortunately, I cannot roll with the RWD in this climate (as Sunday proved during my 8 hour drive from Breckenridge).

I always thought the 350 was a great looking car. I like the new car even more. Then again, this wouldn't make a great daily driver anyway.

I've peeked into a couple mags at work. It's about time they made the sports car an actual sports car. The 350z for the most part was fail as far as performance goes. Good to see they put the 'Z' back into it.

dommo_g wrote:I've peeked into a couple mags at work. It's about time they made the sports car an actual sports car. The 350z for the most part was fail as far as performance goes. Good to see they put the 'Z' back into it.

Actually, I think the 350Z did a pretty good job at being a "sports car", just not a very good job at being a "muscle car". In C&D's annual Lightning Lap, in 2006 the 350Z took first place at VIR in the LL1 class, beating cars like the EVO:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/high_performance/sports_car_central/the_lightning_lap_2006_feature+t-mazda_mx-5+page-8.html

^^^It should be noted that since then, no car in their LL1 class has bested the 350Z's lap time at VIR. On that track, the Z has bested the lap times of the following cars in 2006, 2007 & 2008:

-Chevrolet Cobalt SS (both the supercharged & turbocharged versions)
-Honda Civic Si
-VW GTI
-Ford Mustang GT
-Mazda MX-5 (Miata)
-Mazda RX-8
-Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IX MR (that one really shocked me...)
-Mazdaspeed 3
-Mini Cooper S
-Pontiac Solstice GXP
-Dodge Caliber SRT-4
-Volvo C30 T5 Version 2.0

It also beat several cars in the higher LL2 class:

-2008 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X MR
-BMW 135i
-Lexus IS-F
-Audi S5
-Honda S2000 CR
-Dodge Challenger SRT-8
-Lotus Elise SC
-Infinity G37S
-Dodge Charger SRT-8
-2008 Subaru WRX STI
-VW R32
-Honda Civic Si Mugen

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/high_performance/sports_car_central/the_lightning_lap_2006_feature
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/high_performance/features_classic_cars/the_lightning_lap_2007_feature
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/high_performance/sports_car_central/the_lightning_lap_2008_feature

^^^If you ask me, beating that list of cars, I would say that's doing a pretty damn good job being a sports car. It just lacked in the muscle car department. I'm glad that's being remedied, as the current Z looks to be running times close to the outgoing LS2 powered GTO. Too bad we're at such a high altitude, I think if we were at sea level a lot of us turbo guys would be really surprised.

I know my former Z, at sea level, that thing would spin tires through 3rd... then I moved up here, and I had a hard time chirping them in 1st Altitude+NA car FTL!!

Good info Brandon, although if I had actually bought a car at sea level I would not be driving the MS6, I'd probably be in a Mustang GT, a 350Z, or some other rear wheel drive car.

I bought the MS6 at this altitude so that I could have some fun in any weather, except for ice of course. Although with no one else on the road ice can be fun as well.

I've been extremely disappointed with the new VW R32. THere is one in Highlands Ranch that I've had some fun with and either that guy is a terrible driver or that car is nowhere near what it should be.

Nissan did do a good job, apparently, on the new car. It's a shame Mazda only chose a mild cosmetic/mechanical refresh on the RX8, a car that is essentially the same age as the original 350Z.

bobopud wrote:Good info Brandon, although if I had actually bought a car at sea level I would not be driving the MS6, I'd probably be in a Mustang GT, a 350Z, or some other rear wheel drive car.

I bought the MS6 at this altitude so that I could have some fun in any weather, except for ice of course. Although with no one else on the road ice can be fun as well.

I've been extremely disappointed with the new VW R32. THere is one in Highlands Ranch that I've had some fun with and either that guy is a terrible driver or that car is nowhere near what it should be.

I hear ya buddy, that's the EXACT same reason I bought my Speed6 and sold my 350Z. I do enjoy NA RWD cars, instant torque/throttle response, smoky burnouts ect. I just don't enjoy the lack of power at altitude, and relative lack of traction when the white stuff starts falling. Although, even if I was at sea level where it didn't snow, I don't think I would own another Z... based solely on the fact that there's no place to put my wife AND son lol. At least not safely or legally

One thing to keep in mind, about the above posted info, VIR isn't exactly an autoX course haha. VIR has long straights and high speed sweepers, the kind of course a car like the Z excels at. The kind of track it was made for. On a tighter, more technical course (like an autoX lol), the Z would get smoked by quite a few cars on that list. This is evidenced by the fact the SCCA lists it as a B stock car, while quite a few cars on that list are A stock.

Yeah, I drove an MKIV chassis R32 at sea level, and it was a fun little car... at this altitude though, they're dogs, and I was disappointed that they released an R32 instead of an R36 for the MKV chassis. I've heard rumors it will be pulled from our market due to piss poor sales. Very disappointing car for sure.

I bought my old Speed6 for just about the same reasons you did... although that's also part of the reason why I traded it in for an STI lol. Sacrificed comfort for additional speed/fun. Also got a little frustrated with the Speed6's aftermarket compared to the aftermarket for some of my former cars. Been almost 15 months now, and don't regret it at all I'll be at Bandi come spring time, hoping for 12.99 or better, I guess we'll see.

Huzer21 wrote:Nissan did do a good job, apparently, on the new car. It's a shame Mazda only chose a mild cosmetic/mechanical refresh on the RX8, a car that is essentially the same age as the original 350Z.

Agreed. Give us a damn RX-7 already And not that fugly ass concept...

Here's a comparo between original 240Z and the 370Z. You can really see how similar some of the lines are.

http://speedhunters.com/archive/2008/12/02/gallery-gt-gt-nissan-370z-vs-datsun-240z.aspx

Now if Nissan would just make some updated headlights to look like the 240Z (a la Aston Martin DB7, Maserati coupe, etc.) the car would be amazing. I might have to photochop something like that later.

I went last Monday to check out the new 370Z as it travels across America. Car looks a lot better in person. Interior had a MAJOR upgrade! Exterior looks great. Can see how much shorter (length) and wider it is. Talked to one of the drivers and he feels the "claimed" 332hp is under rated.

As far as aftermarket upgrades... The Z community feels that the VQ37HR will make F/I Built VQ35DE numbers (500+) on the stock block. Now we can argue cost (this vs that) till we're blue in the face. But, no replacement for displacement. Why LS/LT owners make 600+ with mild F/I upgrades.