ventured over to "car comparisons" part of af

and i couldn't believe what i saw. the three threads that involved the 300zx, all they did was bash it. they said it was unreliable, not much of a sports car. i just couldn't believe it.

-Jared

yeah everyone says the 300zx isnt reliable and it isnt all what it is cracked up to be. f*** em' all. i find them very reliable until they get on the wrong persons hands. some f***s like the people that talk shit about them. oh well...some people deserve their ass whooped and some have some sense.

Thats not you is it Zgringo?


Frankly I could care less what people want to think of my car. They want to race I'll be able to hand them their ass so any point worth proving is in the bag. Besides, most people that rag on Z32s are like this dick at work. He thinks hes going to drop a T67 turbo into an otherwise stock Eclipse GSX and make 700hp. I asked him how much a set of forged pistons for a 4G motor costs, he was one brain cell away from asking why he would need them. I just laughed and he looked confused, mostly because I think his mother drank when she was pregnant with him. Not just booze either, must have been like paint thinner or used 10W30 or something.

No thats not me. I have to use both hands on mine. It's something you don't want to be doing while someone is taking your picture. When someone asks how fast my car is I tell them alittle faster than a VW but not as fast as a Bugatti. They just kinda look at me with this strange look, and that ends the subject.

its funny to read those comparisons and people just down play the z. some guy said that the Z has to lose weight to be faster. another guy said that the mr2 was more of a sports car because it had a MR layout and it had less HP and less engine. WTF is that?? let me guess...a civic is more of a sports car than a corvette because it has less of an engine and it creates less power. lol.

i like how people talk about cars that they have never even sat in, in real life. they like to just talk about, i think this car is better because it is lacking the HP that this car has. must be better since the engine is in the back...

I know what you mean. I owned a Porsche 911 turbo and this friend of mine owed me some money and couldn't pay me and asked me if I'd take his car instead. Well I didn't want another sports car, but I didn't want to lose my money so I took his Zed32TT, cost $2,000. I drove it and sold my Porsche, and now own a yard full of Zed's

The 3000GT and 300ZX (Z32) were way ahead of their times with gadgets and power galore (with a hefty price back in those days)... they did not do as well on this side of the pond as they did in Japan and quickly found death in the god ol' USA. People (stupid) tend to think that since they axed so quickly during the 90's that they are suck ass cars...! The mind of an idiot is quite intriguing! And so many great cars saw there demise... the Mazda 323 GTX, Integra Type R, Celica All-Trac, Toyota MR-2/S, S-Chassis 240sx (to a lesser extent), 3000GT, 300ZX, etc.... were they bad cars? No... People are just fucking idiots and tend to jump the bandwagon when it comes to cars... no matter how sophisticated the cars were people tend to want to stick with their Taurus', El Dorado, Mustang GT, Escort GT, and Honda (all cars which are really probelmatic and very unsophisticated!)... if their is no market for sophisticated cars... why should they sell? Why should they be great? FUCK YOU ASSHOLES!

This is the exact reason I try to stay out of the other forums. I go in the Mustang forum...bit of research from time to time...you know..."know your enemy" kinda deal...and I just get into fights. I remember J_Greene from that forum, in fact. Him and another guy or two thought they were having fun playing King Big Swinging Dick so I left. I remember Delerious and Stealth and I think Freak even went over there and said how I owned that conversation...did it matter? No. Of course not. I was out numbered. I don't even remember the topic now. I think it was Turbo vs. Supercharger...I ALWAYS get into it with people about that. The really weird thing is that I don't even go over there to start fights or cause trouble. I'll argue, sure, but I'm not a dick...some of the people in the other forums are just ass holes...so I pretty much just stay to my nice cozy home that is the PZC forum.

Anyway...next time you see some bullshit like that goin on, let us know! We've got your back! Well...I do, at least...PM me!

yeah, i noticed a few people go over the the thread between the mr-2 and celica after i made this thread, thanks k3 and broke. yeah, i mostly stay in PZC, but every once in a while i go see how it is in other parts of af.

-Jared

Geeeeeeez, ZGringo! Thanks for that pic! LoL I just noticed it! LoL

yeah, i noticed a few people go over the the thread between the mr-2 and celica after i made this thread, thanks k3 and broke. yeah, i mostly stay in PZC, but every once in a while i go see how it is in other parts of af.

-Jared

no problem, im still arguing with those guys. i still cant believe soem idiot said that the mr2 is more of a sports car because the engine is in the rear. so a corvette and viper are freaking grocery getters?!?!? WTF

Fuck you all. If you wanna call me a fucking idiot, grow some balls and do it in the Car Comparison thread, instead of running away to your own little forum. And I took back what I said about the MR2 being more of a sports car because it's MR. It's more of a sports car because it's a smaller, lighter car. Simple as that. Look at any of the original British sports cars from the 1950's. You don't see any V6 engines, or anything with a curb weight higher than your standard grocery getter sedan. My mom's 1990 Maxima weighed about 3000 pounds, and a 1990 300ZX N/A weighs over 3200 pounds. That's just ridiculous.

I'm sick of you people and your dogmatic "Z owns everything" bullshit. I'm not checking this thread again, so flame away. :banghead:

i am pm'ing kman.

-Jared

this is what you said.
Honestly, the MR2 is much closer to a true sports car than the 300ZX is. It's lighter, it uses a MR layout, and it has a smaller motor.

honestly dude you need to calm down a bit. im sorry for calling you in idiot, that was unnecessary on my part. i just found that comment was very bias, ridiculous, and ignorant. all as i was stating is that i cant believe someone would say that a car with mid-engine, less HP, less displacement, and is lighter makes it more of a sports car. i know you took it back and i respect you for that but i was just saying that i cant believe you had said that. my bad for the name calling. very unnecessary and disrespectful. my intention was not to come back to "my" forum and disrespect you.

It's no problem, I went for a drive in the pouring rain (scared myself shitless) and calmed down, my bad for coming to your forum and going nuts on you guys. I don't think saying that MR >> FR is really an appalling statement; it may be a crappy opinion, but I dunno why you guys took so much offense to it. Anyways, yeah, I made my case why the MR2 is a more true sports car...whether you agree or disagree is up to you.

thats fine. i think more or less, we the 300zx owners get tired of our cars being dissed because of reliability. i havent meant a 300zxTT owner yet that says that his car is shitty becasue it has had a few maitenance problems. most people that buy z's know that they are probably buying a car that someone has ran the shit out of. oh well. i understand what your saying about the mr2 being a sports car. it does have a true sports car layout but i dont feel that the fact that it is mid-engine makes the car better. just opinions clashing i suppose.

I thought the Z was more of a touring-hi-speed cruiser anyway? What a dumb-prick!

By the way, I never said anything about it's reliability. In fact, I defended it's reliability in that thread. All the other Nissans from that time period were very solidly built, so it must be abuse and lack of proper maintenance for a high-end car that causes the "reliability issues".

yeah i know. i was talking about the other guys.

I've had nothing but good luck with my Zs.

Wanna know what erks me? People saying we're biased. That's simply bull shit. We aren't biased, we just like our cars...we aren't saying they "own everything" or they're "the greatest cars ever built by anyone, anywhere, ever" or anything. They were SOME of the greatest cars ever built, but not THE greatest. There have been many amazing and classic cars that will remain amazing and classic for any number of reasons...there is no "one best"...not even the Z. But anyone that says any ONE car, run of cars, brand of cars...whatever is best...is wrong. There is no ONE best of ANYTHING...make, model, year (yes...on occasion, there is one year that actually IS clearly better than the other years of that particular car, but even that's rare), region...whatever...you can say this about bands/music, too. There's too much emotion and oppinion involved for ONE best of either of these to be possible.

But...Motor Trend, Mar 1990, "Dollar for dollar, it's (the 300ZX is) the best damn sports car in the world." I don't care who you are or what kind of car you prefer, that really is impressive...

the z owns everything....:p

i don't know about you guys but i get alot of complements about my Z. when Z came out to the public they were to expensive and only older folks owned them. basically the Zs were in the wrong hands at the time. know that the Zs are more afortable to many of us and have fallen to the right hands( us ), you begain to see the real power of a Z!

the z is the best bang for your money and with about about a 1k or a little more your bagain to see its true potential.

screw everybody else! the Z in stock form can hang with many of today new sports cars. and properly tune? it will rip a new ass on anybody!

very true JCCR!

We aren't biased, we just like our cars...we aren't saying they "own everything" or they're "the greatest cars ever built by anyone, anywhere, ever" or anything.

You act like it when you mercilessly talk shit about domestics. I'll dig up old quotes if I have to, but just because you believe your car is better than everyone else's doesn't mean you can talk shit as if it were.

the same thing i have noticed with the z33 is that really only older people own them. you don't really see any young people owning them.

-Jared

opinions are expressed in these forums. im sure its not just us that sometimes talk shit about another car. go to any forum on here. people express their opinions and that is what these forums are for. for people to learn and express their feelings. if i feel it is a good car, personally i could care less where it came from.

I love the Z, but its NOT a sports car, its touring car, or as the Americans put it a "Muscle/Pony" car.
Even the Ferrari isnt a sports car. But to say this about the MR-2/S its not a good sports car either, as stated by the "5th Gear" it is a fun drive but, its has to many wizbang gizzmos, and is a bit uncomfortable. But it is a reliable car. They did say the best "sports car" on the market is the Lotus Elise and the clone by someother company that goes faster and has less in it.

But thats just my take on it.

5th Gear Has Some Of The Worst, Most Opinionated, Car Reviewers Out There. The Mr2 Is One Of The Greatest Affordable Mr Platforms. If They Said The Mr2 Has Too Many Gizmos But The Elise Is The Greatest Sports Car They Obviously Never Driven The Elise. The Elise Is Loaded With Features.... I Do Agree Pound For Pound The Elise Can't Be Beat But The Comparisons They Give Is So Biased Its Not Even Funny.

And The Clone Is The Exige.

have you ever driven a elise? if not, than you can't say their opinions are biased because how do you know if their opinions are right or not if you have never driven it?

-Jared

The Elise is more or less the textbook definition of a sports car. The Mazda Miata and Honda S2000 are also good examples. To be completely accurate, a sports car has to have been designed as and intended to be a roadster, but I don't really like that definition...I'd count the Fairlady Z and MR2 as sports cars for sure.

ara yall talking about the MR2 or the MR2 spider? if so that car only has like 138hp. whats so good about it that makes it a true sports car?

Engine 2004 Toyota Echo
Type
1.8-liter, 4-cylinder, DOHC, 16-valve EFI, aluminum alloy block and head
Bore and Stroke 3.10 x 3.60 inches
Displacement 1,794 cc
Compression Ratio 10.0:1
Valve Train 4-valve/cylinder with VVT-i
Horsepower (SAE) 138 hp @ 6,400 rpm
Torque 125 lb-ft @ 4,400 rpm
Ignition System S-Toyota Direct Ignition (TDI)
Fuel System Multi-point EFI
Recommended Fuel 87-octane unleaded
Emission Control LEV

Powertrain 5-Speed Manual 6-Speed Manual
Drive configuration Mid-engine/Rear-wheel drive
Transmission type 5-speed manual 6-speed sequential manual
Gear ratios ( :1)
1st 3.166 3.166
2nd 1.904 1.904
3rd 1.392 1.392
4th 1.031 1.031
5th 0.815 0.815
6th - 0.725
Reverse 3.250 3.250
Differential Ratio 4.312 4.312

check this website!! according to it the MR2 runs high 8s in 0-60 and high 17 in the 1/4 mile! what i'm missing that some of yall are talking about been a great car.

http://www.ssmoparmuscle.com/speedcomp.htm?NORDERBY=make&OORDERBY=make&OORDERDIR=ASC

where are you getting those numbers? the website you listed says 14.7 in the 1320 and 6.2 in 0-60.

-Jared

1/4 mile car performance comparison. thats what i type under search

You act like it when you mercilessly talk shit about domestics. I'll dig up old quotes if I have to, but just because you believe your car is better than everyone else's doesn't mean you can talk shit as if it were.

I don't "mercilessly talk shit". If I did that, I'd be one of those morons that just go around mindlessly bashing everyone and everything that moves...which I do NOT do. I call it how I see it...and until someone presents something to me to change the way I see things, which I'm more than open to...I'm here to learn...then how I see things is just that...how I see things. I give credit where credit is due.

The newer Mustang for instance...I'll bring that up cuz I'm 99% sure this is what you're referring to. Do I like them? No. Why? Is it cuz I don't have one? No...I could if I wanted to. Is it cuz I rolled out of bed one day and decided to just hate them? No. I dislike them for many reasons...some personal reasons that are hard to explain, of which I try to leave out altogether, and the other 99.999% is because of facts. They are the definition of mediocrity. GT...Not a huge engine...SOHC...goes straight ok...doesn't handle great - live rear axle...boring interior...boring exterior...etc...yet there are SOOOO many people out there that love nothing more than to bash ME and start shit with ME about these cars. THIS is why I always end up getting into it with people about these damned cars...cuz, from my personal experience, some of the guys in the mustang forum are beyond stubborn. I'll present fact after fact, all of which resourced and credible, all to no avail. And in the end, *I* get called out for bashing other cars. What the fuck ever, dude.

Musicsurfman, I have driven both the Elise and the MR-S and I can tell you the Elise is not loaded with HALF the crap that a MR-S has. The Elise I test drove at a Lotus/A. Martin/Volvo Dealership in Houston had 4 of them in the place and 1 was for test drives, I know a couple of sales and service people over there and one of them got ahold of the keys to let me drive it. It was a AWESOME car to drive it was spirited and nimble but a little to nimble at times, almost like a go-kart for lack of a better term. Its rear end would come around on you if you werent paying attention to your throttle control but it was still alot of fun. I did love the fact that it had NO carpeting, NO plastic dash peices, NO CD player, NO clock, NO AT, NO roof controls, NO radio (later added for the US market). It was a pure stripped sports car. I wont get one anytime soon becuase of 2 reason, I already have ENOUGH expensive hobbies, and 2- dear goddes my insurance would kill me.

As for the MR-S its a great car too, but I didnt like the fact that it does kind understeer now in comparison to the older MR-2s and its also not as well tuned suspesion wise compared to the Elise. And as for the exteriour styling I still cant get over the "girl" car looks of the MR-S, its just not real uh masculan of a car. It almost looks like it was aimed at the teenage to young single adult girl market, much like the Neon. And for a small car it did have a comfortable interiour to me (5'7" on a good day) . All in all they are both great cars in different market veiws if you are looking for a PURE sports car get the Elise, but if you cant afford the Lotus badge then settle for a MR-S or a Mazda Speed Miata(My personal favorite choice).

I hate somethings about the Miata, like the steering wheel in my crotch but I can work around it sometimes..........sometimes.

Now, I'm a new member, but I just feel like commenting on this. I like the definition someone gave about sportscars as being roadsters. I'm a huge fan of roadsters from the Miata to the Shelby Cobra to Triumph and MG. I, though, own a Mercury Capri (edit: forgot to clarify, it's a 1991 Mercury Capri, not the Mustang equivalent Capri). Now, this is sort of a paradox of cars. It's a FWD 2+2 "roadster". Usually to classify a car as a sports car (or even a roadster) it should be RWD, and most likely a two seater. I love my car, but I have a hard time calling it anything but a "pseudo-roadster". I guess my main point is that lines can be crossed. The 300zx is mainly a touring car, but can be considered a sports car because of the RWD drivetrain, it's convertible option, and even the usual 2 seats. But that, I suppose, is just my opinion.

Anyways, because this is a 300zx topic, I feel obligated to say that the Z-series of cars have been my favorite series for years. Before I purchased my Capri, I was mainly looking for an 80's 300zx. However, due to cost and the fact that the Capri was a convertible, I went with the latter. Sometemes, though, I regret my decision...but then I tell myself that I'll eventually own one and I get back to crusing and enjoying the Capri.


Anyways, my two cents.

~Justin

why people keep calling the z a touring car?!

http://www.cob.montevallo.edu/VascoF/HISTORICALTIMELINE.HTM

Real quick...Miata, S2000...convertables...Shelby Cobra...roadster. By definition, a car that has NO top is a roadster...Shelby Cobra (el drool), original Viper R/T, etc...if a car has some kind of roof that can be put on, it's a convertable...Corvette with the targa roof, MKIV Supra with the targa roof, Miata, and so on...there are biztrillions of convertables...not TOO many true roadsters because roadsters aren't quite as practical.

I really don't care much for labels but I consider the 300ZX a sports car because it will rip you a new asshole and leave your shit in ruins if you try to run against one at the track. But maybe thats me. If I do label cars in this fashion I base most of my labeling on performance.

BROKE_AS_****s CAR DICTIONARY:

Sports cars: Anything that has asswhipping performance stock. They don't have to be entirely unfunctional, they can down right comfortable. Examples: 300ZX TT, Corvette, 911.

Sporty cars: A definite daily driver but can still perform better than most cars. Examples: Eclipse GS, 240SX, Celica.

Bastards: Half-way inbetween, not quite as detuned and daily driverish as Sporty cars but not quite up to their Sport car big brothers. Examples: 300ZX NA, Eclipse GS-X, MR-2.

"Sports Car" is a kinda loose term to me. I have a big problem calling cars JUST built for the strip or whatever true "sports cars", though. They just go straight...that's all fine and dandy, but I think a sports car is meant to be well rounded and balanced.

i agree....to me a sports car is well rounded but can hold its own at anything. when it coems down to drag it holds its own against many cars stock. when it comes to handling...it also can take care of business. you name it, it does it.

this is the true definition..

super cars:
-3000GT twin turbo
-Lancer Evos
-300ZX twin turbo
-Skyline GTR
-Supra twin turbo
-Honda NSX
-Impreza WRX STI
-RX7 twin turbo

sport cars:
-FTO GPX
-Eclpise
-180SX
-200SX
-Silvia
-MR2 turbo
-Celica GT4
-Integra Type R

if u compare a 300ZX twin turbo to an MR2,its like asking a 7 year old boi to run with a 15 yeard old boi..and who will win?
-

i think the super cars name should be just sports cars and the sports cars name should just be called faster than normal cars. i don't consider the STI or evo to be sports cars, they are just really fast economy cars to me. for a sports car to be a sports car, it has to be made as one in the first place, not a car based off of a economy car.

-Jared

Wow, the word super car gets thrown around here too?

The RX-7 is a supercar? Wow you're making it seem like all sports cars are "supercars"

A Supercar was supposed to be the extreme exotic, the top end. The un attainable, few will ever see, fewer drive, and even fewer own.

Words like Zonda, Ferrari, Koenigsegg, come to mind when I think supercars or exotics. Not 1/2 a friggin college parking lot.

People throw the word supercar around way too much. Guys with sports cars call them supercars because grocery getter owners call their cars sports cars.

This is REALLY getting out of hand.

/\ +1

Thats what I said. The term "sports car" has been dropped down to the level of anything thats not a base model Civic. Thats bull****. And I say we begin a bloody eradication of all who over estimate their POS rides.

Shit I Know Some People That Called There Civics Sport Cars

Well put lachean.

3KGT...Lancer...WRX STI...super cars? I dunno, man. "Budget supercars", maybe...but that's a stretch. They're definately sports cars, but they just lack the appeal that I believe is a big part of what makes up a "supercar"...especially the Lancer and STI...so boring looking...most people see them drive by and they don't even double take...you think that would happen with the stereotypical supercar (ferrari, lamborghini, etc)?...I think not. The 3KGT, Z32TT, NSX, Skyline, MKIV Supra, Third Gen RX7...these I could see as "budget supercars"...they are PHENOMENAL CARS...DON'T GET ME WRONG...but I don't think they're on the level of the McLaren F1, Ferrari F50, Lamborghini Murcialago, etc...

Now..."Sports Cars"...200SX?...Eclipse? (you didn't specify, so that includes the slug RS)...180SX?...Kinda stretchin it, man...

lachean does give a very good point. i am also tired of all the people throwing the words supercar and sports car around. sports car is a little bit more leniant, but supercar is something that everybody dreams of, and few of us will even get to see one. it is something that is blistering fast in every aspect. the word supercar is reserved for a car that is almost completely perfected.

-Jared

kinda stretching it!?!?!?!?!....maybe sport compacts but even that i think is stretching it. those cars dont even break into the 15's. my mom's toyota camry is more of a "sports" car then some of those.

i agree with the above. supercars are saved for cars like the mcclaren or lamborghini that 99.999999% of the population would die to even see one, let alone drive. sports cars in my opinion can be squeezed into accomodate more affordable cars.

RX7 is one of the Japanese super cars...all the cars that i've mention before,they are all Japanese super cars...we all know that RX7,Z32TT,GTR,Supra TT etc..are no match for European Exotic super cars like Ferrari,Lambo,Zonda etc...but they are still Japanese high performance super cars

I think the better term for the RX7, 3000GT, Supra, GTR,
300ZX, Mustangs, Camaros and such are performance cars, not sports cars, not muscle cars, not supercars. They are performance cars, all of them are designed to perform well on track days as well as on the road. The sports car is a small car that is fun to drive, doesnt have to be fast, contrary to popular belief it can be quite slow in the quater mile. But they are sporty and nimble and the key word is SMALL. They are not the most practical of cars, they are not designed to meet or beat any of the performance cars or super cars out there. Just to be a budget minded sporty car. They Mazda MX-5 Miata is a great example of a sports car. Its fun, its small its economical, its nimble and its totally not practical.

The performance car market is a hotly contested market for car manufacturers out there, and its been going strong now for almost 60 years. It has produced some of the greatest cars of all time that the average person, with a little luck and planning can buy. Yes even the Prelude, can be considered a performance car. The performance car can trace its haritage back to the days of the Muscle car, no the Mustang is NOT a muscle car it is a Pony car, or a performance car. If you want a example of a current day muscle car then look at the Mercury Maruader, it is a family car platform that has been reworked to get WAY more power and performance out of it to make a stronger car. But its body never changed. It uses straight muscle to beat its oppenents not performance of the overall design. The Maruader was never engineered to be fast, it was engineered to be a family car for old people and cops.

The Japanese are the newcomers to this performance car market their "recent" entries have been the 350Z, RX8 and the Acura RSX-R or S what ever letter they are giving it now days. But Nissan and Mazda have been doing this the longest out of the Japanese manufactures Nissan can date back to the 70s with the 240Z and Mazda can do the same with the RX100. (which was more of a sports car than a performance car) Toyota used to be a front runner in this market for Japan but they did a restructuring of their ideals and decided to go more family oriented with their cars. They made some feeble attempts in the late 90s and early 2000s with the new Celica and the MR-S but niether has meet up to their sales expectations so they are being ended this year. Sad really. They maybe starting a new design of the Supra but it will not be a Toyota, it will be badged as a Scion, but that is just a urban legend so far with no hard facts to prove it yet. But Toyota is still making attempts at makeing performance cars in their other lines like Lexus, with the SC400 and such. But they are making the same mistakes they made in the past, they asking way to much for to little in return.

Enough of my lecturing hopefully some of you will learn from this and I know others of you will gripe about it and inject your own P.O.V.s but for the most part I have stated the trueth about so many things. The sports car is a little car that is a fun drive and is spirited but light wieght, and for the most part designed from the begining to be just those things, the performance car is the next step up, in being designed to be at peak performance on the road as a daily driver or on the track as a weekend racer. The Supercar/exotic car is designed to be more at home on the track than on the road.

word word and wooorrddd nice post hodo

Sorry guys... GTR, Z, GTO/3000GT,RX7,EVO,STI are not sports cars in the true since!


But I heard once these words of wisdom: "If you love it, can get that adrenaline rush out of it... it's a 'sports-car' in that since!"

Why are they "super cars"? You cant just attatch a title to something and by attatchment you leave out justification.

When I hear supercar I think of a purpose built car for the road. Try to think of it this way. We have you, an olympic runner and Clark Kent.

Which of these are normal, exceptional (sporty) and super?

A sports car is an athlete, either fast or nimble. A supercar is outclassing, and definately NOT COMMON.

Im sure you WANT the Z to be considered a "super car" because it is a good car, but running w/ the F1's just isnt happening.

There has never been a full production supercar that anyone out of the top 2% could afford. They're made by the hundreds if that and very few people ever even see them.

---------------------

I'd like to refer to the Top Gear - Pagani Zonda episode when he says, and I quote:

"The word supercar has been somewhat abused these days. They think you can stick a big V8 into any old sports car and earn the title. Im sorry, but you CANT...

... This is a Super Car, a car with agressive outlandish looks, a car with exquisite design and detailing, a car with something better than a garden variety V8, a V12...

In this case a 7 liter, 550HP Mercedes V12 tuned by AMG. Then you want an exotic sounding name, like Pagani Zonda, and a rediculous price tag like 298 thousand pounds."

top gear is by far my favorite show like that out there... if anyone hasn't seen it yet, what the hell are you thinking.. go download an episode!!!

It isn't even a matter of us wanting to call the Z a supercar...I think some people are just a little misguided. The Z, MKIV Supra, RX7, etc are supercars in a sense, but not the most absolute sense as the McLaren F1, Pagani Zonda, Bugatti Veyron, Ferrari F50/F40/Enzo, etc. They are supercars in the sense that they, just as with the true "supercars", will/can lay waste to damn near anything on the road...be it in stock form or not. They are kinda sorta in between the true "supercars" and the basic, plain, regular old "sportscars" segment. Supercars in the sense that they truely are AMAZING CARS.

Motor Trend, March, 1990, regarding the Z32 - "Dollar for dollar, the best damn sports car in the world." Top of the sports car heap...bottom of the supercar heap...kinda in the middle.

:iagree:

i knew it.. the z's a bastard, it's got identity issues... oh get this.. was watching 'pimp my ride' yesterday (had nothing better on) and they did a datsun nissan maxima (really old one.. late 70's maybe? 80's perhaps) and they were like.. is it a datsun or a nissan?? it don't kno whut it is y0!! i'm like it's the same company!! i wish people that did those sort of things actually knew something about cars...

datsun maxima? '70's? It was probably a mid-80's Max... so how did it turn out?