Oh gee darn it! NO NO NO:D Only change it if I don't like the new R35 and have to go buy an R34 or something:rolleyes:

Bad Igor, bad.:D

HaHaHa.

Have to admit I had to call the wife and dog over to see it:eek: ROFL

Back to the Z. Ya keeping the the entire back with that sort of stainless steel look would be cool. I do like that look, how it looks like you are looking at an expensive jewel in a glass case. Very nice.

The only thing I'm not to keen on are the rear tail lights and the huge grill. Other than that the new Z is on my list of cars to look for in 2003. :frog:

Thank the car gods for the brace embossed with the Z logo....
....it would have been hell to pay to fabricate a new one...

What about the door handles? Will they stay vertical? Some say that vertical handles may make dangerous contact with pedestrians..... uhh.... ACH-bullshit-CHOOO.

Actually the reasoning doesnt sound too far-fetched but is it true?

Originally posted by morpheusxiii
Thank the car gods for the brace embossed with the Z logo....
....it would have been hell to pay to fabricate a new one...

What about the door handles? Will they stay vertical? Some say that vertical handles may make dangerous contact with pedestrians..... uhh.... ACH-bullshit-CHOOO.

Actually the reasoning doesnt sound too far-fetched but is it true?

The door handles will most likely stay vertical, but the front end of the handles will probably be covered.

Hmm not sure if I'd like that:confused: I know I don't care to much for the look right now. The stainless steel look clashes with the brite Orange paint job, of course I would prefer a more sutle yet aggressive color. Traditional black maybe:)

There are already quite a few cars that have vertical door handles. Off the top of my head I think the Cavalier and Nissan's mini-van has them now.

As long as they make them as less visible as possible, I'd be happy with it.:D

ALL THE Z NEEDS IS A BACK SEAT !!!! MANN ONLY IF IT HAD ONE IT WOULD BE HELLA BETTER. OWEL... i know its not meant for one but i wish it did have one.... KINDA LLOOOKS LIKE A COPY OF A porshe but its all good IT STILL LOOOKS PHAT!.. but still needs back seats no matter how small they are.

ALL THE Z NEEDS IS A BACK SEAT !!!! MANN ONLY IF IT HAD ONE IT WOULD BE HELLA BETTER.

--whutsdadeal

Your answer: Get TWO new Zs :D

2 Z's and make sure they both come with a stick, don't need no stinken automatics in a real sports car. If you really want a back seat go take a look at the new RX8 from Mazda, tre cool.


You know the really tough part about having the long arse log in name is logging in, that's a lot of typing:silly2:

but of course the PRELUDE is the best with the TURBOOOOOO.
mann o mann i love that car. unless theres someother car like the z but no back seat so i dont like.

Huh? What? Where did Prelude come from? Who really thinks that trendy 'me-too sporty coupe' deserves to be on the same page as the Z? Sure its a decent car, but at that price, for only a FRONT-WHEEL DRIVE, powered by a 4-CYLINDER n/a motor, my money goes elsewhere. But hey, thats just me. Oh by the way, theres talk going on about its discontinuation since it impedes Honda/Acura's real cash-cow: the Integra (now RS-X).

Yup yup agree with you there. You can talk about Skylines, Porsche, and other high preformance cars, but a Prelude is not (sory to hurt your feelings) IS NOT in the same caliber as any of those cars I mentioned. The Prelude is a very nice car, thought of getting one waaaaaaay back when I was in high school. At that price tho there's a lot more choices.

Honda like Nissan and Mazda is going through some changes. I like the idea. If all company's came out with cars like the new Z (not necessarily the same looking car mind you), but at least competed for better performing car title in the end we win.

Nissan is off to a good start with the new Z.:D

:cool:

I just thought I'd respond to the obviously uneducated assumption that 4's don't make torque.

I drive a 1993 Nissan 240sx and I love it more every day I drive it. You see, I am aware that the powerplant is slightly underpowered, but I dare you to find a honda, toyota, mazda, etc. that can put down 130 lb/ft of torque at 2000 rpm under 7000 dollars used. Stop looking because you won't find one. My engine produces 155 hp @ 5500 rpm and 160 torque @ 4400 rpm.

So I guess you could say the only good four is a Nissan four.
It's got power you can use.

And yes I realize this might start a flame war ...
But seriously Hondas really do suck (except for the NSX)

:cool:

HEY HEY HEY!!!

We are NOT including just ANY 4-cylinder machines. No need to defend your position on the 240SX--I know from first hand what a free flowing KA24DE can muster. One buddy with an S14 ran, and got a few initial car-lengths on a (what seemed to be) stock E36 M3. 2.4 liters is massive, especially for a 4-cyl. Thats just 200ccs away from the displacement of the Skyline GT-R. And what have we all learned from this? There really is NO replacement for displacement. VTEC (and other variable cam systems), turbines/blowers, nitrous oxide? They provide merely support for a motor. Perhaps they can expose high numbers on paper, but NOTHING feels like a high-displacement powerplant, especially the oversized ones, such as those of the 240SX models.

If you haven't noticed yet, we are just expelling Honda 4 bangers from this thread. They have no place here. They do not provide the entertainment Z cars can conjure. Honda S2000 you say? It's a wonderful car, but ONLY for the purpose for which it was built. It STILL doesn't belong here. Just understand that we are not making "uneducated assumptions".

I imagine it will loook good in darker colors like dk blue, dk green, or black. If they do make the fenders smaller and give it a more agressive front it will be OK. Alothough I was really hoping that Nissan would have made a bold new statement. This car doesnt entise me to run out and buy it just off of looks alone.

As for the horsepower Nissan will make it whatever they want. Dissplacement wont matter because lowerend F-bodys have 3.8 liter V-6's that are detuned to get 200 hp so they dont compete with the higher line. Nissan may be doing the same thing. My guess is you will see the first year model with 260-270 hp and then they will probably release a higher hp model the next year like 280hp or they will release a Turbo model that will get into the 300's in which they will want the NA model to be low enough to entise people to spend the extra money on the higher version.

I cannot concur with this theory of the Z's future. True, automakers tend to differentiate their autos from each other, as well as specific trimlines, in order to maximize sales between products. Nissan most decidedly will not do this to the Z, especially while involved in financial distress at an international scale. What supports this? The life of the latest Turbo-Z.

How many of the '95+ twin-turbo 300ZXs do you see on the road today? Only a handful. How much did they cost in the end? About $45,000. This exclusivity drove the public away from purchase. Will Nissan allow history to repeat itself? Probably not. The only reason why they are allowing the Z to revive is because they NEED an "affordable sports coupe" to fill the niche in the States. To allow the next Z to float up to the unattainable near $50 grand range would be suicide, as well as a break from the Z's whole philosophy. We must not forget that the original Z was an answer to costly sports coupes, and that plan resulted in instant success. It is obvious that Nissan is making an attempt to use this strategy once again, especially with cars like the expensive Boxter selling.

As for the VQ motor being a "detuned" model, the logic is not possible. We already see the VQ35DE pushing 240hp in the newest Pathfinders. The press states that the VQ in the next Z will have a flywheel output of 260hp; a twenty horsepower gain is easily attainable by any automaker, utilizing freer flowing engine characteristics. Just look at the improvement of the Maxima over the recent years--variable flow technology forced the number up with ease. Therefore, the VQ is already at the peak 'production' level, that is, if an increase in power can only be found by working with bolted on paraphenalia. Nissan's ideology is to lead class by POWER.

If there will ever be a turbocharged model, I will accept it into my world without a second thought. The 280Z turbo hit the mark: quick and cost effective. Why shouldn't a "Turbo 350Z" take the same route?

I must agree with the part that the available pictures of the Z are somewhat odd, being copper-like. However, I understand that Nissan would like their display car to travel back through time, when these colors were popular.

Well, it is now the 21st century, and our appeals have changed. I prefer dark blue hues, and I've altered a Z's photo accordingly:

A red/red Z's interior:

the new z is cool looking, but I sure as hell do not wanna see service engine light coming on, instrument panel vibrating, rotten egg smell coming from the exhaust within the first 5,000miles as I've experienced with their other nissan lineup (2001 G20). so for me, no more nissan. :rolleyes: honda, toyota, bmw are my tickets. :finger: :finger: :finger:

I don't like the new Z too much...it just doesn't remind me of the older ones. I might change my mind w/out that orange paint, though.

Oh, yeah, another car with centered exhaust tips is the C5.

oh yah, and another thing....new nissan interior design reminds me of those clunky boom boxes they sell at circuit city and best buy. robotic metallic color. the hell's with dat steering wheel? the hell's with that shifter? I like the old Z. :flipa: :flipa:

I just called my Nissan "store" (they leased me a 2000 Maxima) and gave a salesman a hard time about the Z. He admitted that they plan on having Z's in the showroom on June 2002. Price will remain the same ($30K for the coupe and about $34K for the convertible option), the horsepower promised to be 300. If that's true, I will kiss my 1 month-old Audi TT quattro coupe 225 good-bye along with the Maxima and hit the road with the Z. I just hope they will make it black :smoker2:

BTW where the heck is the audio box? A cd changer perhaps?

i must say the Z looks much much better in navy blue. But lookswise, I'd take an RSX over the Z. The overall shape is the same (and in pictures the RSX doesn't look to great), but in real life the RSX's body just flows and looks fast. Which is what cars ARE about these days. Why not? Of course, it has to be fast too, but not too fast.

i must say the Z looks much much better in navy blue. But lookswise, I'd take an RSX over the Z. The overall shape is the same (and in pictures the RSX doesn't look to great), but in real life the RSX's body just flows and looks fast. Which is what cars ARE about these days. Why not? Of course, it has to be fast too, but not too fast.

PUHLEEEEEEEEEZ! :rolleyes:

The RSX doesn't compare to the 350Z... it's not even in the same class of car!

I pulled up next to a RSX the other day in my '97 Talon and I felt like I was driving a Ferarri. The tall, narrow stance of the RSX doesn't say "fast" :bandit:... it says "Civic-derivative." It says "I'm a soccer mom, but I'm too cool to drive a minivan." :sleep:

Sorry for the :flamer: but I'm really piss'd at Acura for disappointing me with such a boring reply to something so anxiously anticipated.

Besides... 0-60

RSX: high-6s :crying:
350Z: low-5s :ylsuper:

My money's going for an upgrade... and it's name is Z! :biggrin2:

--------------------------------------------------
DH
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
'97 Talon Tsi AWD ... Honda eater! :rocket:

Originally posted by NissanZ@af
I really like the interior. I think it looks really cool.

i agree, the interior makes the car. :D

Originally posted by the923


PUHLEEEEEEEEEZ! :rolleyes:

The RSX doesn't compare to the 350Z... it's not even in the same class of car!

I pulled up next to a RSX the other day in my '97 Talon and I felt like I was driving a Ferarri. The tall, narrow stance of the RSX doesn't say "fast" :bandit:... it says "Civic-derivative." It says "I'm a soccer mom, but I'm too cool to drive a minivan." :sleep:

Sorry for the :flamer: but I'm really piss'd at Acura for disappointing me with such a boring reply to something so anxiously anticipated.

Besides... 0-60

RSX: high-6s :crying:
350Z: low-5s :ylsuper:

My money's going for an upgrade... and it's name is Z! :biggrin2:

--------------------------------------------------
DH
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
'97 Talon Tsi AWD ... Honda eater! :rocket:

Haha, thats some funny stuff... (and good use of smilies)

And to add to that, the new Z is RWD, has a boatload more torque, and seats only 2. Oh and another thing--I'm glad that Nissan choses to keep their Z car under the Nissan name rather than putting it into Infiniti. I still don't get why the RSX is stuck in the Acura division anyway. It doesn't have anything to do with luxury or exclusivity. Damn, the things they do these days to sell more cars...