I saw one yesterday. Same color as IZ's. It looks incredibly beautiful. I love the way my z32 looks, but the 350 roadster is right there as far as looks go. Finally a Z roadster that has a good amount of power as well.

 

I have seen pics of the roadster with the top up and it does look a little funny...just like the z32 conv.. But when the top is down, I think it looks great...even the back.

 

Makes it look like it has a fat ***! LOL

 

Rizz, you're website still isnt showing pics for me...just to let you know.

 

I haven't gotten around to fixing it yet. I'll probably get around to it in the next few weeks.

 

If you guys don't like the 350 roadsters, do you like the z32 convertibles? Kind of similar idea IMO.

 

The thing that's lame about roadsters is the fact that they are slower and generally don't handle as well. The engine is the same, but it's slower because the car is so much heavier. the extra weight also makes 'em handle like bathtubs 1/2 full of wtaer. I don't understand why people buy convertible sportscars.

 

I can agree with that...the only convertible that is pretty dang worthy is the sl55 amg.

 

No offense coupes are fine but it ain't a true sportscar if it ain't a roadster. That's why roadsters sell for more and always bring more at the auctions. FYI, the 350Z roadster is quicker than the coupe. As for handling my roadster takes Lime Rock and Pocono with the best of them.

 

http://nissan.jbcarpages.com/Z/2004/index4.php
According to this, the roadster is heavier than the coupe and has the same bhp. Physics aren't on your side on this one. Do you have a link that has something more valid to prove your point?

 

I can't remember where I saw the numbers.It was on a review/comparison of the roadster in a magazine. It was either Autoweek, Motor Trend, Sport Z, Sport Compact Car,Super Street,Hot Compacts and Imports. I read a lot of stuff and am not sure where specifically I saw it. But I saw it in a few places and was surprised, because logically you would think the coup would be quicker. Mind you the difference was not huge but it was quicker. As a matter of fact I am meeting with a Nissan Zone rep later today, maybe he has some answers.
MWest300zx/350z

 

Hey, well if you find a link or some info, I'd be interested in seeing about this. It's just hard to believe that a car that is heavier, has more wind resistance due to the cloth top that acts like a parachute, and has the same bhp is going to be faster. Find a link, I'm sure I'm not the only one that'd be intrigued by this.

 

That's the first time I've heard of the "roadster" argument about being a true sports car. some people think a 4-passenger hardtop is a true sports car if it has enough power and handles well...

Anyway, I also like the 350Z roadster much better than the hard top. But in my opinion they are both true sports cars.

What if you have a 2-seater convertible with little or now power? Miata? or how about some power but no torque? S2000?

 

Good luck calling a Miata a "true sports car"

 

Sports cars come in all flavors. A 4 seater that handles and performs (ie:BMW's) is a sports sedan. Yes, hardtop 2 seaters as well as drop tops are sports cars including the Miata. They all fill different niches. Call them whatever you want, as long as the owner/driver is happy that's all that matters.

 

I think the miata is a true sports car. It has a large following, strong sales and strong aftermarket support. What other criteria do you need?

 

...so does the 2-door Civic.

But i was just throwing out some ideas. I also agree that the miata fits its own bill, but I myself like to see a sports car as a V6 or V8 engine. (or larger) A little less practical basically. And only a 2-seater. A sedan can be fun to drive, but is not a sports car. BMWs are good cars though.

My 280ZX 2+2 is a great car and I love it, but honestly its not a true sports car, mainly due to the back seat. But guess what... there's a car seat back there for a baby. So really its a 2-door family sedan with t-tops and a six cylinder.

 

Haha. Bleach is right. Nobody would ever say that the 2 door Civic is a sports car, except for your typical rice racer. Sports cars used to have a more simple definition. I think nowadays, the term sports car has a very broad definition. Some may say that the MBZ SLK is a sports car. I disagree simply because it does not have a manual transmission as an option. The car was not built with speed and performance being the primary odjective. Some may say it should have 2 doors. Not necessarily true. Look at the S4 and M5. A sposts car now seems to encompass the overall appeal of the car. The whole package. The suspension, the body, the engine. The question to ask would be, " Does the car having a racing heritage?" If you can answer yes, then it's a sports car. If you answer no, it probably isn't, but it could still pose an argument. The car that will always be a puzzle is the Volvo 850R wagon. A station wagon that on a consistent basis would kick the crap out of the BMW's on and off the track. But it's a wagon. Can a wagon be a sports car? Apparently, yes!

 

Not that I'm supporting Civics, but they do get raced in competition. I even saw someone win the SCCA championship in a civic. I dunno what class but he won in it.

 

Agreed! How can a car with the same power specs, more weight and less structural rigidity be faster and handle better than the alternative. Sorry, but you're wrong. A true sportscar does not have to be a convertible either. Does that mean the new Beetle convertible is a sportscar? Doubtful.

 

you guys are beating a dead horse

 

So what; I'm enjoying the moment. I didn't get as much enjoyment out my last few posts as I has expected.