I am with you on that noel.

 

I dunno, every Z or G35 owner I met on the road has been VERY cool with me. We sometimes chat at the stoplights or give eachother the thumbs up when we pass eachother. I always felt Nissans/Infiniti always have respect for eachother. Unlike Honda/Acura where if they see another Honda/Acura they get into competition rage....

- Don't argue with idiots. They will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.=P-

 

Disclaimer: I started having too much fun writing this, and it seems to have turned into more of an essay than a post. Please excuse my verbosity...

On the definition of a sports car, I think it's become a much grayer area than it once was.

In the early days, sports cars were almost without exception 2 seaters. MGs, Jaguar XKs, Austin Healeys, Aston Martins, Triumphs, Morgans, Sunbeams, Corvettes, Ferraris, Maseratis, Lamborghinis, Mercedes SLs and early Porsches were unquestionably pure sports cars. The only iffy cars from this era were the 2 seat pre-'58 Thunderbird, and the first few years' production of the Corvette, both of which were designed and marketed as "personal" cars, without as much emphasis on performance. The Thunderbird quickly morphed into a 4 seat "image car", and the Vette went the other way and became a true sports car.

Otherwise, cars were pretty much family oriented. They had very little ability to compete with sports cars, particularly in handling. They were usually set up with comfort as the overriding concern chassis -wise.

Later on, Fiat X1-9s and 2000 Spyders, Nissan 240Zs, Mazda RX7s, Acura NS-Xs, Mazda Miatas, Dodge Vipers, Audi TTs, Mercedes SLKs, BMW Z3s and the Nissan 350Z followed in the original sports car tradition. All these cars are very sporty and generally impractical, trading utility for acceleration and handling. These attributes have thus informally become the criteria for the definition of a sports car.

Along the way though, Porsche 911s grew back seats, and Ferrari introduced high performance 2+2 designs as did Maserati, Aston Martin and others. Then along came high-horsepower 4 passenger American muscle cars like the Mustang, Camaro, Firebird and GTO to further blur the line. BMW started building sedans that accelerated AND handled well. The Japanese got into the act too.

So right now, for my own $.02, here's how I see it:

"True sports cars" have only 2 seats, although cars with outright "joke back seats" that are utterly unusable as such, except to to cram an impressionable 4 year old or an adult contortionist into for a maximum of 5 minutes, like on the Porsche 911 series, qualify. In order to do so, these cars must feature high performance in both power and handling. Sadly, the new 2 seat Thunderbird, a return to the "personal car" concept, does not.

"GT" or "Grand Touring" cars should have "usable" back seats, but must very closely resemble 2 seat sports cars otherwise, both appearance-wise and in terms of performance, particularly handling ability. I would characterize the G35C as one of these. Others would be the Porsche 928, Nissan 300 ZX 2+2, various recent Ferrari 2+2s, latter-day Aston Martins, the new Maseratis, and the Mazda RX-8. The Lexus SC series are a borderline call since their performance is questionable.

"Muscle Cars" resemble the sedans they're based on, but are much flashier looking and have greatly enhanced performance, usually more oriented toward horsepower than handling. They have bigger, more practical back seats and larger trunks than GT cars, sit higher off the ground, and are relatively affordable. The Mustang originated the type, followed by the Camaro, Firebird, Barracuda, Challenger, Charger, Olds 4-4-2, Pontiac GTO, AMC Javelin, Buick Grand National and others. Numerous Japanese cars also fit this description, like Supra Turbos, Mitsubishi 3000GTs and all the smaller souped-up models like the Subaru WRX. Almost any sedan can be made into a muscle car if the manufacturer decides to do so.

"High Performance Luxury Sedans" (or sedan-like coupes) are another category, and are usually German. BMW M-series, and to a lesser extent non M-series cars, Mercedes specialty models like AMG versions, and the Audi S-series cars are in this category. Lexus G series cars might also qualify, as might the G35 sedan. This category is not overbalanced to favor horsepower like muscle cars, but don't particularly resemble sports cars (as GT cars do) either. They do everything very well, but manage to look (and to a lesser extent, drive) like sedans.

So that's how I see it. Four basic categories, ranked in order of "purity": true sports cars, GT cars, muscle cars and performance sedans.

I say we G35C owners have us a fine GT car, and G35S owners have some bragging rights in the world of high performance luxury sedans. Not bad...

 

Excellent write-up. The Miata & the 240Z were acknowledged as the two best sportscars of all time. (BTW, this comes from automotive editors, not my own opinion). Miata, b/c it is the best selling sportscar without a model redesign (still has not been redesigned since it was introduced), and the Z, b/c it is the best selling model name sportscar in history.

 

Who gives a fack I love my G, it's still a sports car? And by the way I see the 350z 20x a day it just sucks! Where I live, I don't see that many G coupes, most are SEDAN's.
And guess what I saw 6, 350z on the streets today man EVERYazz Is driving that car. So I don't give a Shiiiit!

 

I cannot call a car without a V8 a muscle car.

 

"Miata, b/c it is the best selling sportscar without a model redesign (still has not been redesigned since it was introduced)"

Well it actually was redesigned, but very much within the original look. The front end was the biggest change, going from popup lights to integrated ones, and is different in a few other details as well. I think most of the other body panels are changed from the original too, mostly in the form of some subtle sculpting and creasing here and there.

Fundamentally you're right though, it's still very true to the original look.

 

"I cannot call a car without a V8 a muscle car."

It's true that all the original American muscle cars (for which the name was coined) had big powerful V8s. But big V8s were the rule in most sedans back then too. In the 60's a car with a 6 cylinder engine was regarded like cars are now that have weak 4's. Wimpmobiles. For grandmas and librarians.

Nowadays V8s are pretty much exclusively found in expensive performance/luxury or sports/GT cars (and trucks, but we're not talking about trucks). They're also still found in the last true descendants of the 60s era cars, so-called full-size cars like Crown Vics, Lincoln Town cars and big Cadillacs. The modern day equivalent of the 60's era standard issue sedan engine though, (pushrod V8, maybe around 200 net HP), is a similarly powerful DOHC V6.

So as far as I'm concerned, a "muscle car" is basically a factory hot-rod: a souped-up, jazzed-up version of a sedan/coupe model. Power to weight ratio and flashy styling cues are the basic ingredients.

 

Ok, so the G doesn't fit the technical definition of a true sports car...but then again, neither do Porsches apparently. Sounds like a stupid definition.

 

"Ok, so the G doesn't fit the technical definition of a true sports car...but then again, neither do Porsches apparently. Sounds like a stupid definition. "

If you happen to be responding to MY definition of a "true sports car" as having only 2 seats, then you should note the exception I stipulated for true sports cars that have what are often called "vestigial", or essentially unusable, rear seats like the Porsche 911 series. If I remember correctly, the 924/944 series also had similarly worthless "rear seats", as did the Fiat 2000 Spyder.

The G35C's back seats are quite roomy and usable, making it a GT car rather than a true sports car. Like most true GT cars though, the difference in actual performance and style versus a true sports car is minimal. The 350Z proves that point perfectly.

 

No, just responding to the earlier post where someone said that a true sports car must have 2 seats, be rwd, and something else. Any definition that's that cut-and-dry is stupid.

Road and Track called the Ferrari Enzo a true GT, so I guess the G is in good company.

 

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

Both cars are awesome. I've given and recieved thumbs-up from Z owners in my area, and I think there's a mutual respect...as there should be.

<hr></blockquote>
Preach on, Bro, preach on. Amen!


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

 

I wouldn't call the G35 a sports car. It's more of a sports coupe, or luxury grand tourer (GT). Given its size, luxury features (which add weight) and the fact it has a back seat pushes it more towards the GT class than a sports car. The 350Z is a sports car: it's smaller, lighter, and with only 2 seats and a tiny trunk, its clear its priorities are more for performance than practicality or luxury. Same goes with my Z06 - its a 2 seater with its priority set on performance, light weight, etc., not luxury. While it does have quite a few luxury features, its not even close to being a luxury car. It does get kind of confusing though. Like the Cadillac XLR for example: It's a 2 seater that performs very well, which sounds like it should be a sports car. But I consider it a GT, not a sports car, even though it only has 2 seats, and is based on the C6 Corvette. Why? Because performance is not its #1 priority - luxury is. With the Corvette, luxury takes a back seat (figuratively speaking) to performance.

Is the #1 priority with the G35 performance? I don't think so - #1 is luxury and technology, with performance #2. With the 350Z, performance is the #1 priority, with luxury and convenience #2.

2003 G35C, 6MT, DG/G, Aero/Nav/Premium
2002 Corvette Z06, Electron Blue/Black

 

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

I cannot call a car without a V8 a muscle car.

<hr></blockquote>

I'm with ya on that. But I do have once exception to that rule: the Buick Grand National, which of course runs a turbo 3.8L V-6. Everything about that car is a muscle car, yet it doesn't have a V-8. Same goes for the 25th anniversary Trans Am with the same motor.

2003 G35C, 6MT, DG/G, Aero/Nav/Premium
2002 Corvette Z06, Electron Blue/Black

 

Per most discussions I would agree that the G is more of a GT that a real sports car...it just struck me as silly that the definition of a sports car could be limited by virtue of only having 2 seats.

I would disagree on the ptiorities for the G Coupe though...I don't think luxury was put ahead of sport in the design of the car. I think performance was still the priority, but with comfort and amenities as a close second. Take a look at the G's luxury accommodations as compared to say, a BMW and you'll see what I mean - the bimmer has things like wood grain, heated mirrors and headlights, theater lighting, automatically lowering side mirrors, etc. The G on the other hand doesn't even have memory seats. It's interior while very cool looking - is sporty and functional, not luxurious. To me it is very clear that exceptional luxury was not the goal of the coupe. I think it's more to deliver awesome performance and an outstanding driving experience while offering a very competetive set of luxury amenities.

Heck, Kazutoshi Mizuno who led the development of the G had once been team manager of Nissan's LeMans and Group C racing efforts. In his own words, he designed the G to have the heart of an endurance racer.