350z vs 300zxTT
01-16-2004 | 08:42 AM
#1
Thread Starter
confuzed member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,074
From: Salinas, CA
350z vs 300zxTT
Here's another Top Gear video for you guys. There's a race between a 300zxtt and a new 350z in it. The themes old vs new. Check out the NA GTI beating up on the new 1.8T GTI, VW needs some work.
http://www.nissanzx.pwp.blueyonder.c...earOldvNew.wmv
http://www.nissanzx.pwp.blueyonder.c...earOldvNew.wmv
01-16-2004 | 03:21 PM
#3
Thread Starter
confuzed member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,074
From: Salinas, CA
Yep it is a stock TT. I'm not sure about the TT driver as compared to the 350 driver either. I've raced a 350. Granted, it was on the highway and I'm a stg III+, but I killed it. It was no contest. and the guy looked like he had exhaust too. He came up on me and I waited till he was right on me till I gunned it, and even then, I was only in 4th at about 70. He never moved from where I left him.
01-16-2004 | 07:37 PM
#4
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,494
From: Palmyra,Va
this guy hasa 350 in my school ,and i raced him, but he doesn't know how to drive bc i swear i beat him by a car lenght every time. i dunno i know 350z can beat an n/a but i've smoked a few tt's as well. i doubt they had any work done on them
01-16-2004 | 08:22 PM
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
Here's some real world stats on the 300ZXTT and the 350Z that may help you guys straighten this out:
I have pulled 1-2 car lengths at LEAST on the TTs I have raced in Houston.
Both stock:
NISSAN 300ZX TWIN TURBO
Engine Type: V-6t
0-60 mph: 6.0 seconds
Horse Power: 300 hp
1/4 Mile: 14.4 seconds
Top Speed: 155 mph
Braking from 60 mph: 124 ft.
Braking from 80 mph: 219 ft.
Skidpad: 0.88 g
Slalom: 63.0 mph
Fuel Mileage: 18.7 mpg
MSRP: $39, 500 US
NISSAN 350Z TRACK
Engine Type: V-6-N/A
0-60 mph: 5.4 seconds
Horse Power: 287 hp
1/4 Mile: 14.0 seconds
Top Speed: 156 mph *Governor limited
Braking from 60 mph: 119 ft.
Braking from 80 mph: 217 ft.
Skidpad: 0.89 g
Slalom: 65.6mph
Fuel Mileage: 20 mpg
MSRP: $34, 079 US
In conclusion....the driver of the 350 may not have been real familiar with it yet.
I have pulled 1-2 car lengths at LEAST on the TTs I have raced in Houston.
Both stock:
NISSAN 300ZX TWIN TURBO
Engine Type: V-6t
0-60 mph: 6.0 seconds
Horse Power: 300 hp
1/4 Mile: 14.4 seconds
Top Speed: 155 mph
Braking from 60 mph: 124 ft.
Braking from 80 mph: 219 ft.
Skidpad: 0.88 g
Slalom: 63.0 mph
Fuel Mileage: 18.7 mpg
MSRP: $39, 500 US
NISSAN 350Z TRACK
Engine Type: V-6-N/A
0-60 mph: 5.4 seconds
Horse Power: 287 hp
1/4 Mile: 14.0 seconds
Top Speed: 156 mph *Governor limited
Braking from 60 mph: 119 ft.
Braking from 80 mph: 217 ft.
Skidpad: 0.89 g
Slalom: 65.6mph
Fuel Mileage: 20 mpg
MSRP: $34, 079 US
In conclusion....the driver of the 350 may not have been real familiar with it yet.
Last edited by IZwutumean; 01-16-2004 at 08:47 PM.
01-16-2004 | 09:41 PM
#7
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,494
From: Palmyra,Va
i got an injen intake, set of unorthodox pulleys, stillen headers with custom piping all the way through to the flowmasters stock looking quad exhaust.also one important part that ppl overlook when they go for performance is the suspension. i have kyb adj agx shocks with eibach springs, front and rear struts, i've changed most of the bushing with polyurethane ones, and i have sway bars. i had to add some adjustable rods and upper arms, also i have a piggyback computer ( safc2 ) that adjusts my air/fuel ratio, and timing, short throw shifter, and overall my z's engine just runs perfect...it runs better than any z i've seen. i run it on 17" american racing wheels with 225/45/17 all the way aroundi have beaten a fewtt's that i have raced, that i know haven't been modified. my friends tt blows me out of the water, but i will leave him at the start for about a car lenght or so. also i've been driving since i was six, and the tt's i've raced didn't look like they had work done to them. i know a good tt would smoke me, i was just saying that most of the ppl around here who have tt's don't know what they have, and never work on them. if you don't work on your Z i don't carewho you are the car will not run good.,. i love my n/a
01-16-2004 | 10:04 PM
#10
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,494
From: Palmyra,Va
we are also talking about 13 yrs of technology development. back in 1990 everything was much bigger computers, cell phones, and technology for the cars wasn't as advanced as it is today. a lot of more computers now than back then
01-16-2004 | 10:31 PM
#11
Thread Starter
confuzed member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,074
From: Salinas, CA
Where did you get your stats? Car and Driver thought incredibly differently:
0-60 5.0 sec
1/4 mi in 13.8
and the top speed on the z32's is also limited.
The 350z was measured at:
like you said 0-60 5.4 sec
1/4 mi 14.1
and that's the track model.
0-60 5.0 sec
1/4 mi in 13.8
and the top speed on the z32's is also limited.
The 350z was measured at:
like you said 0-60 5.4 sec
1/4 mi 14.1
and that's the track model.
01-16-2004 | 11:06 PM
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by emo236
And take a look at the link at the top of the page....that's hard proof.If you Don't believe me, world renown magazines, the numbers... believe your eyes.
And take a look at the link at the top of the page....that's hard proof.If you Don't believe me, world renown magazines, the numbers... believe your eyes.
Just because I have a video of a Camaro smokin a Viper does not mean it is the faster car. Maybe the guy in the Viper had a bad launch.
The numbers (actual numbers..not the fictional numbers in your head) speak the truth. Not a race video.
It is amazing to me how TV can affect some folks' grasp on reality.
Sheesh.
01-16-2004 | 11:09 PM
#14
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,672
From: Gerber, CA
IZ-
I have to wonder where you pulled your stats from? I beg to differ with you on a few key points. I had to hunt through some sites to find this, but it came primarily from Road and track or Car and Driver.
350 Z 300 ZX
0-60: 5.7 C&D 6.0 R&T 0-60: 5.2 C&D
1/4 mile: 14.3 C&D/14.0 R&T 1/4: 13.8 C&D
skidpad: .86g C&D skidpad: .91g C&D
slalom: 67.6 MPH R&T
I've eaten up a few 350Z's on the road, but it's not really a fair comparison. My car's only an ignition upgrade away from Stage VII according to Stillen (whatever the hell that means). The car's fast. My personal preference is the 300 over the 350. The 300 has more of mean, yet classic look to it.
Wrecker-
Did the people in the TT's you raced know that they you were racing them? It sounds like you have a nice car, but IMHO I still don't think you've got enough yank under the hood to pull on a TT unless the TT driver's asleep at the wheel. Sorry man.
I have to wonder where you pulled your stats from? I beg to differ with you on a few key points. I had to hunt through some sites to find this, but it came primarily from Road and track or Car and Driver.
350 Z 300 ZX
0-60: 5.7 C&D 6.0 R&T 0-60: 5.2 C&D
1/4 mile: 14.3 C&D/14.0 R&T 1/4: 13.8 C&D
skidpad: .86g C&D skidpad: .91g C&D
slalom: 67.6 MPH R&T
I've eaten up a few 350Z's on the road, but it's not really a fair comparison. My car's only an ignition upgrade away from Stage VII according to Stillen (whatever the hell that means). The car's fast. My personal preference is the 300 over the 350. The 300 has more of mean, yet classic look to it.
Wrecker-
Did the people in the TT's you raced know that they you were racing them? It sounds like you have a nice car, but IMHO I still don't think you've got enough yank under the hood to pull on a TT unless the TT driver's asleep at the wheel. Sorry man.
01-16-2004 | 11:17 PM
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Also, keep this in mind fellas....
...we are comparing N/A to forced induction.
Slap twin turbos on the 350Z VQ, and then compare the two.
It would wipe it's a$$ with the 300ZX TT.
My point was, they have engineered the new N/A engine to produce a greater amount of power than the 300ZX TT, which, consequently, costed $10k more than the 350Z several years later! (or an equal amount of power, depending on which magazine you keep in your bathroom)
...we are comparing N/A to forced induction.
Slap twin turbos on the 350Z VQ, and then compare the two.
It would wipe it's a$$ with the 300ZX TT.
My point was, they have engineered the new N/A engine to produce a greater amount of power than the 300ZX TT, which, consequently, costed $10k more than the 350Z several years later! (or an equal amount of power, depending on which magazine you keep in your bathroom)
01-16-2004 | 11:19 PM
#16
Gold Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 300
From: Chicago, IL
Hey, I could've sworn I had a debate just like this not long ago!!! Hmmm...now where did it go...
I'll be right back!
Here it is!! Go check it out and add it to your already extensive plethora of knowledge. I think it got pretty heated last time! I was not unlike IZwutumean in support of the 350Z's potential...
I'll be right back!
Here it is!! Go check it out and add it to your already extensive plethora of knowledge. I think it got pretty heated last time! I was not unlike IZwutumean in support of the 350Z's potential...
01-16-2004 | 11:32 PM
#17
Gold Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 300
From: Chicago, IL
Furthermore, please keep in mind that most people that are "racing" their Z32's are much more willing and likely to beat the crap out of their cars (I do with my Z), whereas a driver of a brand spankin' new Z33 would be much more reserved and cautious of such unorthodox and unhealthy (for the vehicle) behavior. Who wants to spend around $30 grand for a new Z and trash it the same week?! Uhm...except maybe Nismo...
A brand new Z33 would also need to be broken in, unlike the Z32, to achieve its maximum potential and remain competitive!
A brand new Z33 would also need to be broken in, unlike the Z32, to achieve its maximum potential and remain competitive!
01-16-2004 | 11:35 PM
#18
Thread Starter
confuzed member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,074
From: Salinas, CA
I still don't know where you got your numbers. WE got ours from Car and Driver. Now it's your turn. Also, guys have TT'd 350s and they are impressive, but sorry, they don't wipe their a$$ with the 300. The 350's motor is strong, but it's meant to be NA. The people who have done it weren't able to go over 8 psi. Yes, that's faster than a stock TT, but not a stage V or above. Which costs less $ may I add.
01-16-2004 | 11:43 PM
#19
Gold Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 300
From: Chicago, IL
Here!! It's here!!! Click here!
Scroll down to the section with the Z32 data. The 5.0 data that you pointed out is there, but is only the fastest data. An average of all the date of non-modified twin-turbo Z's turned out to be around 5.59 seconds to achieve 0-60. But of course, as mentioned in the previous debate, driver skill has much to do with it!
Uhm...I don't take credit for finding that site. Someone else found it for me. Thanks again!
Scroll down to the section with the Z32 data. The 5.0 data that you pointed out is there, but is only the fastest data. An average of all the date of non-modified twin-turbo Z's turned out to be around 5.59 seconds to achieve 0-60. But of course, as mentioned in the previous debate, driver skill has much to do with it!
Uhm...I don't take credit for finding that site. Someone else found it for me. Thanks again!
01-16-2004 | 11:53 PM
#20
Guest
Posts: n/a
Moot point
Well, I suppose it is pointless to argue about it.
Both cars, the Z32 with its TT, and the Z32, with normal aspiration, are both so close in performance, it really depends on the driver....and that's about all it comes down to, no matter how blue in the face you become defending it. (Have a glass of water)
I will be biased, because I love my 350Z...and you will be biased towards your 300ZX for the same reason.
I have smoked several TT's in my area on the track and on the street...and you guys have smoked 350s on your tracks, etc.,etc...
Yes, the 300ZX TT has a burst of turbo power that gives you a lunge forward....whereas, the 350Z has a more linear torque curve, which feeds you constant power, yet never gives you a defined surge or rush of power.
Either way, this argument would perpetuate itself into a vicious cycle were I to go on, and this seems like a decent forum thus far.
Go put your C/D back in the bathroom and enjoy a Valium.
Both cars, the Z32 with its TT, and the Z32, with normal aspiration, are both so close in performance, it really depends on the driver....and that's about all it comes down to, no matter how blue in the face you become defending it. (Have a glass of water)
I will be biased, because I love my 350Z...and you will be biased towards your 300ZX for the same reason.
I have smoked several TT's in my area on the track and on the street...and you guys have smoked 350s on your tracks, etc.,etc...
Yes, the 300ZX TT has a burst of turbo power that gives you a lunge forward....whereas, the 350Z has a more linear torque curve, which feeds you constant power, yet never gives you a defined surge or rush of power.
Either way, this argument would perpetuate itself into a vicious cycle were I to go on, and this seems like a decent forum thus far.
Go put your C/D back in the bathroom and enjoy a Valium.
01-17-2004 | 12:05 AM
#22
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by Copper727
<Sigh> Nobody is reading a word I'm saying...
Oh well, that's life I suppose...
And Emo, are you picking on the new kid on the block?? Tsk tsk! Be nice!!
<Sigh> Nobody is reading a word I'm saying...
Oh well, that's life I suppose...
And Emo, are you picking on the new kid on the block?? Tsk tsk! Be nice!!
Me thinks Emo just has a complex. He's probably a very nice young man. Just needs somebody to give him a hug every now and then! Oh..and don't forget the Valium, please.
01-17-2004 | 12:09 AM
#24
Thread Starter
confuzed member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,074
From: Salinas, CA
I don't mean to be harsh. I just dont agree and neither do...oh nvm, I'll drop it. I wasn't mad or anything. I was being civil, right? that's a forum, "discussions" where each side proposes numbers and hard evidence and a decent argument and the other responds. I don't mean to pick on the new kid on the block so to speak. That's just how forums work.
