lol you guys are hilarious... fighting between who has the better NISSAN.

get over yourselves


kids, both are great cars, enjoy what you have and stop hatin'

 

Ahhh...no thread is complete without e46fanatic's pathetic attempt at being patronizing. If anyone needs to get over themselves, it's you buddy. I'm just having a little fun here with qirex...doesn't mean I disrespect his ride. The fact that the Z would be my ride had I not heard of the G says it all.

Now run along...I'm sure there are more "kids" all around the internet that require your wisdom...

 

I'll be honest, between the Z and the G, I'd never be able to decide on looks alone.
Where the Z edges the G in a raw muscular look, the G edges the Z in refined, clean styling.

Performance is barely worth comparing... though I haven't driven a Z myself, the reviews I've read tell me that I'd sacrifice some ride in the Z, but gain a bit of handling. Acceleration, to a 40 year old guy just looking to have fun (I've never had much interest in street racing), there's not enough difference to concern myself with.

But what it came down to is, I have 4 kids and a passion for golf. I doubt I could fit my golf bag in the trunk of a Z, let alone mine and my friend's when we play on Wednesdays. Need to pick up my daughter and one (or more) of her friends? I can do that - I couldn't in the Z. That alone was the basis of my decision, but I believe both are beautiful cars worthy of envy (from those that don't have either!)

2003 G35 Coupe 6MT Leather
Premium, Aero
"There is no spoon"

 

Compairing text numbers does nothing to champion a victor. Numbers mean nothing if theirs something else out their that's got numbers that are close,.............but is more useable and more repeatable performace wise, by the cars human operators. If you've never driven the Z up to it's performance envelope, your not going to understand this. This isn't a conclusion draw on reading to many magizines, it's draw on having driven both cars to the limit and making a judgement call. Which car LETS me do everything performance wise better and easier. Obviciously the coupe has it's know advantages, but it's incorrect to look at the text and pronouce victory just from that text. Case in point. Final thoughts Road and Track on the 350Z, Porsche 911 Targa, Chevrolet Corvetter z06, and BMW M3 SMG comparo. Every one of those cars has, better 0-60, 1/4 mile, and skidpad numbers. Given the logic of better numbers, the Z's lap times should be last.
Corvette Z06 1:36.50
350Z 1:40.06
BMW M3 SMG 1:40.09
Porsche 911 Targa 1:40.79
see what I mean, not the case.

"Our Z Factor notes reveal that the 350Z gives away very little performance relative to its more costly competitores. What's not shown in the numbers is the overall ease with which the Z can be driven. Thanks to a willing engine and capable chassis, the 350A makes it possible for impressive levels of performance to be accessed with minimal fuss."

And here's a quote that sum's up that I'm talking about on the whole.

"Dynamically, there are few cars so immediately comfortable to drive quickly. Thoughtful chassis and suspension tuning have made it relatively easy (and huegely satisfying) to hustle the Z around offramps and racetracks alike.. Excellent overall balance allots it to seamlessly process braking, steering and throttle imputs without undulely upsetting the chassis. Fore-to-aft weight transfer has a numimal effect on the cars composure, allowing the driver to transition from braking to power morequickly when cornering.

Yes the G35 coupe and the Z are the same FM platforms. But the differances between them, softer suspension, more weight, longer wheelbase make for a differance that benefits the Z, not the coupe.


Ivry 6mt sed
Injen CAI, 22" resonator
8X18 Enkei RPM2 45mm
Kumho MX 245/40
clear corners

 

I don't get it...you start by saying that numbers are near meaningless in the grand scheme of things, then conclude your post by effectively saying that theoretically, the Z has the advantage (softer suspension, more weight, longer wheelbase).

Ok, so if you want a a real-world comparison, take a look at the G35 vs. M3 vs. 350Z video posted on here recently. You will see that the G consistently out-corners and out-brakes the Z around the track and ended up with the same overall time of the Z despite its disadvantage in straightline speed, having slightly less HP and higher weight. And this by the way is with a less experienced driver behind the wheel of the G35. Add the Pilot Sports that we get on the Gs here and it removes all doubt as to which handles better on the track.

And for the record, I've driven both the Z and the G - both are just as easy to push to their limits. I have felt the wayward rear ends of both cars, but I felt it was a lot more pronounced with the Z. The G feels more planted and more stable to me which is why I have no trouble believing it puts up the numbers it does on the skidpad and slalom.

 

"The G feels more planted and more stable to me which is why I have no trouble believing it puts up the numbers it does on the skidpad and slalom."

Concurrently, car and driver and road and track both said were higher than the previously tested Z.

but hey Gsedan...thats just numbers ... race em.
see for yourself !

"Lest you think these aesthetic compliments are damning with faint praise in this sporting test, the G35 was no slouch in the performance department. Clocking 14.2 seconds at 100 mph in the quarter-mile, this G coupe was quicker than the last 350Z we tested (December 2002), despite being 137 pounds heavier (3500 versus 3363) and motivated by seven fewer ponies (280 versus 287). With 60 mph available in 5.5 seconds and a top speed of 155, this is one fast coupe. "

heres the link for C&D .. too lazy for the R&T
http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=4

just in case you wanna read from the "pros"

thats all I'm saying ..... just stickin up for me G

 

Gsedan35 wrote:
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

Compairing text numbers does nothing to champion a victor.

<hr></blockquote>

Dude, you obviously seem to be an intelligent person, how could you so completely miss the point of my post??

The REAR SEAT AND USABLE TRUNK were what made the difference for me - NOT THE PERFORMANCE. It'd be a rare occasion that I push my car to it's performance envelope, and rarer still - if ever - that it sees a track. I'm not an SCCA racer, nor am I inclined to street race (again, as stated previously). I just wanted a car that was truly fun to drive, while retaining a degree of real-world practicality. The G gives me that, the Z doesn't. But both are beautiful cars.

Clearer now?? Geez...

2003 G35 Coupe 6MT Leather
Premium, Aero
"There is no spoon"

 

Look, I wouldn't be surprised if the Z was a tiny bit nimbler over a similar course when the driver has a bit of time behind both wheels. But qirex seemed to think the idea that the G might handle better was so preposterous as to require the consumption of controlled substances. The most commonly tested benchmark for this, however, makes a clear statement otherwise. Skidpad, of course, does not measure all types of handling and performance, but we know there's at least one threshhold at which the G is superior to the Z in holding the road. We've got zero for the Z over the G. We also have that G35/350Z/M3 video, though that too is not a flawless measurement. But at this point, we'd have to say that the available empirical evidence is (a tiny bit) in favor of the G's handling. No chemical-use necessary.

-Jack
Obsidian/graphite '03 Coupe premium nav

 

arguing over the internet is makes us all look stupid.

!st of all, Best motoring is hardly what I call controlled testing. If you notice. The G started first. The Z rapidly closed the gap by the 1st corner but alas was unable to *pass* due to the fact that YES these cars are of really similar capability. If you watch a lot of the BMVs you'll notice that the idea is not really to test but to address "street controversy". I'm not saying the G handles poorly at all - rather the opposite.

I just think that some ppl get carried away here. The two cars are very similar. The G gives you a bit more lux/practicality, while the Z gives you a bit more performance while sacrificing practicality.

The idea that "Why would anybody buy a Z?" is prepostorous as it is implying that the G gives you BOTh more performance AND lux/practicality.

0-60 on diff days by diff testers and diff cars means nothing. SKidpad, again is more an indicator of the tires than overall habdling. Handling is a very complex matter. Even so, you guys may wonder "why does the G have better tires?" Well better is again subjective. Granted, the pilots are a stickier tire, however for the same money, Nissan chose to give up some overall grip (at that price point) and mount a run-flat tire with tire pressure monitoring instead.

I've said it before and i'll say it agin - there's tons of subtle differences btw these fine cars that belie their respective purposes. In the same way you guys dont miss a CF driveshaft, CAI, strut tower brace, tighter suspension, reinforced underbelly, lower seating position and such....I dont miss a sunroof, extra back seats or faux aluminum paint.

IN another thread, some jackass implied that the fact that C&D/Mt/RT clocked a G35 "...faster than the last Z they tested" meant that the Gs extra weight helps it put the power down better...thats just stupid.

Its also stupid to assocuate longer wheelbase, more stability with *better* handling. Its a common fact, what you gain in stability you gain in responsiveness. Obviously at a point when the w/b is so short the car becomes a handful.

This talk about the Zs "loose rear end" is ridiculous. I guess that means that 911 (especially of the mid 80s) were terrible sportscars? Or that we all should be driving FF coupes with No oversteer? The Z has amazing balance at 9/10, I havent taken mine to 10/10 but I bet when I do, things will happen in the same predictable unharried fashion - much like I'm sure the G does.

Lets bury this thing once and for all - I'm in the minority here, so I'll just let you guys get back to sucking each other dicks. When you're all done and want to talk about cars, mods or track events (where are the ALMS G35s?) I'll be game for that.

Sayonara!

 

"!st of all, Best motoring is hardly what I call controlled testing. "

So basically, first you mock magazine numbers and now you're discrediting Best Motoring's track performance. Qirex, apparently you know better than the pros who do nothing but drive cars and write about them, so please enlighten us on how it is so preposterous that the G could handle better than the Z despite the facts I have brought to the table. And don't say things like a stability bar and tigher suspension because anyone that jack shlt will tell you that those two things do not always directly correlate with better handling unless all other factors are kept equal (which is not the case here).

"IN another thread, some jackass implied that the fact that C&D/Mt/RT clocked a G35 "...faster than the last Z they tested" meant that the Gs extra weight helps it put the power down better...thats just stupid."

I'm not the person that made that claim in the other thread, but if I had to venture a guess for how the G fared better, I would say that the stickier tires probably just gripped the pavement better off the line.

"Its also stupid to assocuate longer wheelbase, more stability with *better* handling. Its a common fact, what you gain in stability you gain in responsiveness. Obviously at a point when the w/b is so short the car becomes a handful."

No, but if that longer wheelbase allows for a lower center of gravity, then it is certainly possible. In driving both cars myself, the G feels more planted and I have read others feel the same way from multiple sources - there's no reason not to think so.

"This talk about the Zs "loose rear end" is ridiculous. I guess that means that 911 (especially of the mid 80s) were terrible sportscars? Or that we all should be driving FF coupes with No oversteer?"

Nobody even remotely implied that loose rear ends make terrible sports cars. I personally don't mind it a bit - it's easy to keep under control and fun once you learn how to use it.

"Lets bury this thing once and for all - I'm in the minority here, so I'll just let you guys get back to sucking each other dicks. When you're all done and want to talk about cars, mods or track events (where are the ALMS G35s?) I'll be game for that. "

Funny, I was the one who brought up the track event... which of course you promptly dismissed. Somehow, I don't think any amount of information is going convince you that your Z isn't superior so it's probably for the best that we just let this die.

"Sayonara!"

Don't let the door hit you.

 

I agree with Conquie - if you want to argue numbers, go right ahead, but real-world concerns tend to take precedence when one is judging a car by what it will do for you, not what it does on the track.

I owned a 280zx for several years until it was stolen from my driveway. I rejoiced when I heard they were bringing it back until I got a look at it. In the original, I could pack a ton of stuff. Keyboards and amplifier, or a pair of congo drums, no problem. I could move my stuff out of an apartment - not counting furniture of course - in two trips. That, on top of the car's performance, made it a dream come true. I loved that car and miss it to this day.

When I saw the trunk that the 350z had, well, disappointed is not the word.

When I saw the coupe - ah! dreams DO come true! [img]/w3timages/icons/smile.gif[/img]

"Moderation in all things, including moderation."

 

Yep and if you had something a wee bit larger ... well you could stick it out of the sunroof.
ahhahah

and Mani... the more posts you make .. the happier I feel

and qirex99 .... that sucking d*ck thing ...DUDE ! ... look at your user name here, first time I saw it, I was like WTF?

qirex99 sounds a wee bit "funny"
(queer x 99) like you were, but now your a x,
99 instead of 69/man woman ...get it?

DUMB !! yes !!.. but your name nonetheless.

sayonara !!

and let it hit ya on the a$$ on the way out, I get the feeling you'd like that there qire !

[img]/w3timages/icons/cool.gif[/img]

 

Things Shellycat and I have in common:

Music (I'm a recording engineer)
Eastern Philosophy
G35C

What's not to like?

 

Oh, and I almost forgot while I was dreaming about Shellycat... : )

The topic...

I test drove a 350Z (as well as a 330ci) as part of "due dilligence" in deciding whether or not the G35C was really the right car for me. During the admittedly too short test drive, and by the seat of my pants only, the Z seemed virtually the same as the G, although I didn't drive either one particularly close to its handling limits. The acceleration felt indistiguishable between the two, although the Z was very noticeably noisier from the engine compartment in a way that I did not like, as opposed to the exhaust sound, which I do. I'm guessing it's the intake or a lack of sound insulation or both.

While I like the Z's styling, it's a bit too radical for my taste (I'm 51...a *young* 51, but 51 nonetheless). The G35C on the other hand exudes class and tasteful restraint within the context of a still very sporty looking car. By the stares I get driving it down the street I don't think anyone's confusing it with a Camry.

Then there was the matter of practicality. A "usable" back seat (even got the thumbs up from my 83 year old dad!), the fold down rear seat/storage factor (like Shellycat I sometimes carry large amounts of music gear) was a very significant advantage for me.

One of the reasons the Z test drive was so key in my choice was that I wanted to make sure the "sports car driving experience" wasn't something that was present in the Z and absent in the G. It wasn't. The G felt almost every bit as sports car-like to me.

Then there was fit and finish. While I have my quibbles with the G's interior quality, it nonetheless took that one hands down. The Z lacked leather and many interior parts looked shockingly cheap; the nav system cover in particular was an absolute POS. This is a pretty darn expensive car. What were they thinking?

Then, features: sunroof and the aforementioned folding back seat thru to the trunk, the better warranty, loaner cars, seemingly more upscale dealership etc. Magazine writers reported a "freeway hop" issue with the Z that they felt was considerably better on the G. My '95 BMW 325is had lots of that and it was probably my biggest gripe with the car. I *really* didn't want a car like that again.

So for me it was a no-brainer, and the Z test drive just sealed the deal. I'm absolutely *loving* my DG/G 6MT G35C Premium/Nav/Aero...