Nissan 370Z
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 392
From: Roch, NY
it takes more than just an engine to make a fast car. remember - the new 370z is expected to weigh only about 3000 pounds. give nissan some respect - no GM motor close to 3.7 liters is producing anything near 350 hp. even the DI 3.6 still is 'only' producing a few more than 300hp. give credit where it's due.....for a v6, nissan engines kick serious ***.
some very basic hypothetical situations we need to consider with all of the above:
a 350 hp 3000 lb Z would push roughly 8.5 pounds per hp.
a 400 hp 3600 lb 2010 Z28 would push 9 pounds per hp.
even though the z28 has more overall hp, and would 'only' have to push .5 more pounds per hp, the difference in total weight of about 600 pounds would still place it at a 300 pound (hp/lb ratio) disadvantage.
a 350 hp 3000 lb Z would push roughly 8.5 pounds per hp.
a 400 hp 3600 lb 2010 Z28 would push 9 pounds per hp.
even though the z28 has more overall hp, and would 'only' have to push .5 more pounds per hp, the difference in total weight of about 600 pounds would still place it at a 300 pound (hp/lb ratio) disadvantage.
our new z28 would have to be at least 425 hp and no more than 3600 pounds in order to equal the power/weight ratio of 8.5 per hp of the z.
reduced weight, and smaller more high-tech motors = less work on the motor, better handling, instant fuel savings and closer CAFE compliance.
gm needs to watch what the competition is doing closely and put their collective minds together and bring the new camaro in as light as possible. nobody wanted the portly 3900 pound GTO - even with 400 hp it was too damn massive to toss around, making it even more of a gas guzzler.
Top Gear loved it and recommended it over a 50,000 dollar Jaguar. Educate yourself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-oHeLPX3zM
there is absolutely no reason the new camaro should be any bigger or much heavier than an 80's fox body mustang.
less is more.
less is more.
Also performance isn't everything to everyone, I want a car that's comfortable as well, after all I own a hot rod Buick.
Last edited by 93Phoenix; May 15, 2008 at 09:46 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 392
From: Roch, NY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vW7rp...eature=related
There is a video of it.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 602
From: Alpharetta, GA
in the famous words of toretto: "winning is winning.....whether by an inch or a mile"
as for how many years it took nissan? nissan's z has not ever competed with pony cars. it has nothing to do with what nissan 'could' have made to compete with a 10 yr old ls1. pound for pound or liter for liter, a nissan v6 puts out more power per cc than an ls1.
conversely, what's getting the ls1 owners panties in a bunch is their fabled cars are being matched and surpassed in power....and that's hard to accept especially from a mere japanese v6. that's what matters 10 yrs after an ls1 was introduced.
it's truly amazing how little respect so many of you have for a powerplant of great technical ability, in a pretty small 3.7 package. if it was a gm engine everyone would be singing such praise for 350 hp from a 3.7 there'd be a human sacrifice to thank the gods.
and btw, nissan's z car has been king before.....it knocked chevy's corvette on the canvas in 1990 with the intro of the 300z tt. had it not been for that car, gm would never have been motivated to immediately cross the 300 hp barrier in 1992 with lt1's or even ls1's later on. back then, chevy never did see the knockout punch coming.....far away from the land of the rising sun.
same short-sighted rationale i see with fbody owners dissing mustangs, and how they're not as quick as ls1's - baloney. sure some ls1's are faster, but not ALL are faster than a new stang. they're very close in performance, but we have blinders on, and talk down anything that's not GM.
if it were not for the success of the mustang we would not be looking at a new camaro right now......competition is a GOOD thing. a rival having a good or better product forces GM to come up with something even better.
same with the 1990 z - it forced gm to do better in every aspect of the vette inside and out.
the point is, as noted in the article, the zcar is expected to weigh 3010 pounds. mustang's are expected to lose weight as well in 2010, yet i hear nothing from gm proposing a < 3500 pound 2010 camaro to match ford. big hp alone will not win a majority of buyers.....gm already failed using that formula on the gto. more weight = more engine to move it. more engine = more wasted gas. more wasted gas = more money pissed away. oil is $124 a barrel. consumers are running like hell from gas guzzling vehicles....pay attention to what the competition is doing, gm.
as for how many years it took nissan? nissan's z has not ever competed with pony cars. it has nothing to do with what nissan 'could' have made to compete with a 10 yr old ls1. pound for pound or liter for liter, a nissan v6 puts out more power per cc than an ls1.
conversely, what's getting the ls1 owners panties in a bunch is their fabled cars are being matched and surpassed in power....and that's hard to accept especially from a mere japanese v6. that's what matters 10 yrs after an ls1 was introduced.
it's truly amazing how little respect so many of you have for a powerplant of great technical ability, in a pretty small 3.7 package. if it was a gm engine everyone would be singing such praise for 350 hp from a 3.7 there'd be a human sacrifice to thank the gods.
and btw, nissan's z car has been king before.....it knocked chevy's corvette on the canvas in 1990 with the intro of the 300z tt. had it not been for that car, gm would never have been motivated to immediately cross the 300 hp barrier in 1992 with lt1's or even ls1's later on. back then, chevy never did see the knockout punch coming.....far away from the land of the rising sun.
same short-sighted rationale i see with fbody owners dissing mustangs, and how they're not as quick as ls1's - baloney. sure some ls1's are faster, but not ALL are faster than a new stang. they're very close in performance, but we have blinders on, and talk down anything that's not GM.
if it were not for the success of the mustang we would not be looking at a new camaro right now......competition is a GOOD thing. a rival having a good or better product forces GM to come up with something even better.
same with the 1990 z - it forced gm to do better in every aspect of the vette inside and out.
the point is, as noted in the article, the zcar is expected to weigh 3010 pounds. mustang's are expected to lose weight as well in 2010, yet i hear nothing from gm proposing a < 3500 pound 2010 camaro to match ford. big hp alone will not win a majority of buyers.....gm already failed using that formula on the gto. more weight = more engine to move it. more engine = more wasted gas. more wasted gas = more money pissed away. oil is $124 a barrel. consumers are running like hell from gas guzzling vehicles....pay attention to what the competition is doing, gm.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,947
From: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Originally Posted by foxbat
the point is, as noted in the article, the zcar is expected to weigh 3010 pounds. mustang's are expected to lose weight as well in 2010, yet i hear nothing from gm proposing a < 3500 pound 2010 camaro to match ford. big hp alone will not win a majority of buyers.....gm already failed using that formula on the gto. more weight = more engine to move it. more engine = more wasted gas. more wasted gas = more money pissed away. oil is $124 a barrel. consumers are running like hell from gas guzzling vehicles....pay attention to what the competition is doing, gm.
the point is, as noted in the article, the zcar is expected to weigh 3010 pounds. mustang's are expected to lose weight as well in 2010, yet i hear nothing from gm proposing a < 3500 pound 2010 camaro to match ford. big hp alone will not win a majority of buyers.....gm already failed using that formula on the gto. more weight = more engine to move it. more engine = more wasted gas. more wasted gas = more money pissed away. oil is $124 a barrel. consumers are running like hell from gas guzzling vehicles....pay attention to what the competition is doing, gm.
The GTO comes in at 17/25mpg, manking 400hp/400lbft, weighs over 400lbs more than the 350Z..
The base Vette comes in at 16/26mpg, weighs a mere 100lbs more and makes 430hp/424lbft!
What was GM thinking?
The GTO may have flopped, but it wasn't weight/hp/mpg that did it...
PS: Oh, the G37 weighs over 3650lbs, makes 330hp/270lbft and comes in at 17/26mpg............
Last edited by 90rocz; May 15, 2008 at 11:26 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 602
From: Alpharetta, GA
The 350Z comes in at 18/25mpg with only a 306hp/268lbft output version.
The GTO comes in at 17/25mpg, manking 400hp/400lbft, weighs over 400lbs more than the 350Z..
The base Vette comes in at 16/26mpg, weighs a mere 100lbs more and makes 430hp/424lbft!
What was GM thinking?
The GTO may have flopped, but it wasn't weight/hp/mpg that did it...
PS: Oh, the G37 weighs over 3650lbs, makes 330hp/270lbft and comes in at 17/26mpg............
The GTO comes in at 17/25mpg, manking 400hp/400lbft, weighs over 400lbs more than the 350Z..
The base Vette comes in at 16/26mpg, weighs a mere 100lbs more and makes 430hp/424lbft!
What was GM thinking?
The GTO may have flopped, but it wasn't weight/hp/mpg that did it...
PS: Oh, the G37 weighs over 3650lbs, makes 330hp/270lbft and comes in at 17/26mpg............
I don't really understand the harsh reactions to the 370Z. It's a cool car. Period. I'm not going to buy one, but I like the fact that cool cars are still being made, in the midst of the panic surrounding gas prices. I don't want to buy a Cobolt (unless it's an SS), or a Corolla.
Super Moderator
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 9,507
From: Okemos, MI
That's because it has less torque at any given RPM. They have to adjust the gearing in order for it to still perform like they want it to.
The downside of the shorter gearing is decreased economy and, usually, gear-limited top speed.
The downside of the shorter gearing is decreased economy and, usually, gear-limited top speed.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,947
From: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Originally Posted by Tokuzumi
The V6 turns more RPM at any given speed. If the GTO and the Vette turned the same RPM, the mileage would be a completely different story.
The V6 turns more RPM at any given speed. If the GTO and the Vette turned the same RPM, the mileage would be a completely different story.
I don't really understand the harsh reactions to the 370Z. It's a cool car. Period. I'm not going to buy one, but I like the fact that cool cars are still being made, in the midst of the panic surrounding gas prices. I don't want to buy a Cobolt (unless it's an SS), or a Corolla.
In fact, it looks way better than the GT-R, to me.
As far as the GTO goes, the formula of a sleeper, that worked so many years ago, flopped b/c of the price point it came in at, IMO.
It walked the walk, but whispered the talk.
It dissapeared in parking lots.
Last edited by 90rocz; May 16, 2008 at 09:32 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 574
From: Richmond, TX
A 3010lb 350hp Nissan will be mid 12 car. And it will *ssrape a stock LS1 fbod.
In fact it will be competitive with the LS2 vettes.
Now let's see if that is what Nissan rolls out.
In fact it will be competitive with the LS2 vettes.
Now let's see if that is what Nissan rolls out.
Last edited by BigBlueCruiser; May 16, 2008 at 09:41 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 602
From: Alpharetta, GA
Top speed is not really a concern, because intelligent people will not need a higher top speed on normal roads. Top speed is like a LCD TV built in to your fridge. It's nice to have, but serves no real purpose for daily use, other than for bragging rights. How many people here could handle a car at the top speed? The LT1 f-cars were able to do 155+ (6 speed car) from the factory. LS1 f-cars just a little higher. I wouldn't want to try that.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,947
From: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Well, the G37 coupe makes 330hp and weighs 600 lbs more and runs basically 14 sec flat.
I doubt dropping the weight and adding only 20hp will give a very similar car, a second and a half.
I might buy very low 13's...
Just where the G8/GXP will be...and where LS1/SS's are.
I doubt dropping the weight and adding only 20hp will give a very similar car, a second and a half.
I might buy very low 13's...
Just where the G8/GXP will be...and where LS1/SS's are.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 602
From: Alpharetta, GA
Well, the G37 coupe makes 330hp and weighs 600 lbs more and runs basically 14 sec flat.
I doubt dropping the weight and adding only 20hp will give a very similar car, a second and a half.
I might buy very low 13's...
Just where the G8/GXP will be...and where LS1/SS's are.
I doubt dropping the weight and adding only 20hp will give a very similar car, a second and a half.
I might buy very low 13's...
Just where the G8/GXP will be...and where LS1/SS's are.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 574
From: Richmond, TX
Well, the G37 coupe makes 330hp and weighs 600 lbs more and runs basically 14 sec flat.
I doubt dropping the weight and adding only 20hp will give a very similar car, a second and a half.
I might buy very low 13's...
Just where the G8/GXP will be...and where LS1/SS's are.
I doubt dropping the weight and adding only 20hp will give a very similar car, a second and a half.
I might buy very low 13's...
Just where the G8/GXP will be...and where LS1/SS's are.
Actually they're getting 13.8@~103 from real owners.
Yeah, I see where you're going though.
I would have revise my estimate to 13flat@~105. No bottom end torque. Bench racing a V6 doesn't add up using the V8 model.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 574
From: Richmond, TX
Because anytime anyone posts anything about a new performance car in this section, some GM fanboy has to comment about how it still can't outrun an LS1 fbod.
Oh look, it's still uglier, slower, and less practical than an LS1 4th gen, and now it's even more expensive.