Nissan 370Z
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,154
From: All around
If both engines weigh, say, 450 lbs and take up a box that is 20x20x20 inches under the hood, what difference does it make if one is "only" 3.7L?
The only other concern is the noise the engine makes - and as far as V6's go, the 350Z has (imho) one of the best sounding V6's ever made... It has a distinct howl that is unique to that engine/exhaust setup and is quite beautiful whizzing past.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,448
From: Irving, TX
a 5.7 liter ls1 outputs 61 hp/liter. a 6.2 ls3 outputs 70 hp/liter. a 330 hp 3.7 in the g37 nets 89 hp/liter. a 350 hp 3.7 Z motor will output nearly 95 hp/liter. pound-for-pound or liter-for-liter whichever you prefer, the Nissan motor is superior in it's hp output for its relative size.
wake up people......there are other good brands out there and gm would be wise to learn from some of the things they are doing. same goes the other way....other brands could learn some things from what gm is doing.
be objective in our thinking
wake up people......there are other good brands out there and gm would be wise to learn from some of the things they are doing. same goes the other way....other brands could learn some things from what gm is doing.
be objective in our thinking
300hp 1.0L engine that weights 10lbs but cost 2M is worthless. That is objective thinking.
LS1's were and are great engines. They were introduced 11 years ago and can still hang with many of its competitors current offerings, many competitors only meeting these standards, not exceeding.
One final note on the weight of the 370Z. The G37 coupe weighs about 3600 lbs. The G35 coupe weighed about 200 lbs more than the 350Z. I expect this to be more of the case and see a 350Z with 3400lbs or maybe it will have a 2 star crash test rating.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,724
From: Hebron, KY
The numbers of the "Z cars" have always trepresented the engine displacement in centiliters, or 1/100 of a liter.
A Datsun 240Z's engine displaced 2.4 liters, the Nissan 280Z's 2.8 liters, the 300Z equaled 3 liters, 350Z is 3.5 liters.
Yes, that means the new 370Z has a 3.7 liter engine.
Regarding performance of cars, it's silly slamming this car by saying it doesn't accelerate as quickly or doesn't have the top speed of a LS1 Camaro. Cars are judged as a package, and don't have to be "quicker than an LS1" to be an awesome performance car, or far superior one.
Final subject, based on the article, the new 370Z will lose over 200 pounds while remaining the same size, which in itself is no small feat and no doubtedly cost Nissan a pretty sizable amount of money... which is going to be passed down in price. If the weight of 3000 pounds sticks, it will be within 35 pounds of a Pontiac Solstice GXP and a mere 75 pounds more than a Cobalt SS. Yet the engine makes 350 horsepower!!
To counter some of the responses on the thread so far:
1. 350 horsepower in a 3010 pound car (ie: a 370Z for instance) is alot quicker than 350 horsepower in a 3500 pound one (ie: an LS1 Camaro for instance).
2. If the 370Z does 0-60 in under 5 seconds (as predicted) of course it will be quicker than LS1 Camaros. Magazines had them in the low 5 second range. Last I heard, 5.2 seconds was longer than 4.9 seconds.
3. I don't put alot of stock in photochops being the actual look of upcoming cars. The new Car & Driver has a photochopped Mustang on the front cover that isn't likely to be the actual way it will look.
A Datsun 240Z's engine displaced 2.4 liters, the Nissan 280Z's 2.8 liters, the 300Z equaled 3 liters, 350Z is 3.5 liters.
Yes, that means the new 370Z has a 3.7 liter engine.
Regarding performance of cars, it's silly slamming this car by saying it doesn't accelerate as quickly or doesn't have the top speed of a LS1 Camaro. Cars are judged as a package, and don't have to be "quicker than an LS1" to be an awesome performance car, or far superior one.
Final subject, based on the article, the new 370Z will lose over 200 pounds while remaining the same size, which in itself is no small feat and no doubtedly cost Nissan a pretty sizable amount of money... which is going to be passed down in price. If the weight of 3000 pounds sticks, it will be within 35 pounds of a Pontiac Solstice GXP and a mere 75 pounds more than a Cobalt SS. Yet the engine makes 350 horsepower!!
To counter some of the responses on the thread so far:
1. 350 horsepower in a 3010 pound car (ie: a 370Z for instance) is alot quicker than 350 horsepower in a 3500 pound one (ie: an LS1 Camaro for instance).
2. If the 370Z does 0-60 in under 5 seconds (as predicted) of course it will be quicker than LS1 Camaros. Magazines had them in the low 5 second range. Last I heard, 5.2 seconds was longer than 4.9 seconds.
3. I don't put alot of stock in photochops being the actual look of upcoming cars. The new Car & Driver has a photochopped Mustang on the front cover that isn't likely to be the actual way it will look.
I don't remember the declaration of the "LS1 F-body as the performance standard all cars will henceworth be judged," but many board members are not at a loss for drawing comparisons to any car made since. Hey, I liked them too (I owned an LT1, the previously declared world-beater), but there are other, legitimate performance cars that are oranges to those apples.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,011
From: Exton, Pennsylvania
a lot of selective reading going on here: i noticed you 'overlooked' the part of the sentence that said: "liter for liter." read what i said again: pound-for-pound OR LITER PER LITER. just to clarify for those not familiar with it's usage, here is a wikipedia description of what pound-for-pound means: "It can also be used to describe how any two things compare when bearing in mind their varying quantities." we are not talking about the actual weight in pounds or kilograms. a 5.7 liter ls1 outputs 61 hp/liter. a 6.2 ls3 outputs 70 hp/liter. a 330 hp 3.7 in the g37 nets 89 hp/liter. a 350 hp 3.7 Z motor will output nearly 95 hp/liter. pound-for-pound or liter-for-liter whichever you prefer, the Nissan motor is superior in it's hp output for its relative size.
so lets see.....if the lt1 was in development for "several years," why then did it only appear 2 yrs AFTER the automotive press and public deemed the 300ztt a superior vehicle? why not same year as the z, or even before? and why then at the same hp rating of 300hp as in the z? nissan set the 300hp mark and everybody else followed. the lt1 was not in development for any number of years....it was scrambled together in about 2.5 years using 70% existing small block hardware between 1989 when the z was rumored to have 300hp, and late 1991 when the lt1 was mass produced. aside from aluminum heads and reverse flow cooling it was nothing revolutionary that required the "years" of development you guys are implying. by god, how many "years" of development did it take gm to come up with the wonderful optispark system right under the waterpump. it was a stop-gap holdover motor rushed into production to match the competition until the ls series was developed
When do you think development of the LS engine began?
exactly where in my post do i declare to be an expert or official source? this is all internet discussion, opinions, and where we heard something. where do i claim that this is official information from ford? motor trend and an internet blog are hardly confirmed sources, but the point is this is what nissan and for are working towards and gm is not.
some of the comments in this thread and the defense of sub-standard gm products of the past are quite surprising. for 7 years i've been on this board and i never really realized how deep in the gm sand some members have their heads buried.
wake up people......there are other good brands out there and gm would be wise to learn from some of the things they are doing. same goes the other way....other brands could learn some things from what gm is doing.
be objective in our thinking
some of the comments in this thread and the defense of sub-standard gm products of the past are quite surprising. for 7 years i've been on this board and i never really realized how deep in the gm sand some members have their heads buried.
wake up people......there are other good brands out there and gm would be wise to learn from some of the things they are doing. same goes the other way....other brands could learn some things from what gm is doing.
be objective in our thinking
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,398
From: Fairfax Station, VA. Formally Long Island :(
at the HP/L argument. It is so worthless. If HP/L had any validity, we would all be driving nitro powered OS engines found in R/C cars and airplanes.
Last edited by Slappy3243; May 19, 2008 at 11:04 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 545
From: Tampa
aside from a few intelligent individuals in this thread (guionm, tokuzumi, and some others) this discussion has turned into a waste of time. akin to spitting facts into an ocean of mindless blithering.....makes no difference at the end of the day.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 1998
Posts: 642
From: Atlanta, Ga
[magazine racing mode]
Interesting article from 1990, Corvette vs 300zx: http://www.300zxclub.com/magarticles/c&d90/c&d90-1.htm
You'll notice the 300zx lost by a second around the road course and by a tenth through the 1/4. Kinda crappy 1/4 numbers for both but it's at least a valid same day/same track comparo.
I'll give you that is likely more of a fluke since it's a L98 Vette, but they still ran pretty good and being nearly 200 pounds lighter never hurts. I don't think I've seen a comparison article where the LT1 lost to the stock 300zx over the years though. I don't remember any, and searching online I didn't find any either.
Here's a LT1 powered Vette vs others comparo including the 300zx, the Z eats dust again: http://www.geocities.com/ma71supratu...93cdsupra.html
Hmm, sensing a trend, LT1 Vette works over 300zx again, both straight line and around the track: http://www.geocities.com/ma71supratu...94rtsupra.html
Yep, knocked Corvette on it's *** all right.... Chevy was running scared from the 300zx, so scared it ran faster than the 300zx stock vs stock in every available test I can find, lol...
Course the 300zx still scored higher on the overall ratings in most of the tests since the C4 is kinda a POS...
the 300z tt knocked the vette on it's backside. like it or not. the vette of that year lost every single objective test it ran against the z. when you lose, you gotta eat crow, and the vette lost that for the years the z was made in the early 90's. even the lt1 vette was still inferior of the tt z.
You'll notice the 300zx lost by a second around the road course and by a tenth through the 1/4. Kinda crappy 1/4 numbers for both but it's at least a valid same day/same track comparo.
I'll give you that is likely more of a fluke since it's a L98 Vette, but they still ran pretty good and being nearly 200 pounds lighter never hurts. I don't think I've seen a comparison article where the LT1 lost to the stock 300zx over the years though. I don't remember any, and searching online I didn't find any either.
Here's a LT1 powered Vette vs others comparo including the 300zx, the Z eats dust again: http://www.geocities.com/ma71supratu...93cdsupra.html
Hmm, sensing a trend, LT1 Vette works over 300zx again, both straight line and around the track: http://www.geocities.com/ma71supratu...94rtsupra.html
Yep, knocked Corvette on it's *** all right.... Chevy was running scared from the 300zx, so scared it ran faster than the 300zx stock vs stock in every available test I can find, lol...
Course the 300zx still scored higher on the overall ratings in most of the tests since the C4 is kinda a POS...
Last edited by Ray86IROC; May 19, 2008 at 11:33 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 392
From: Roch, NY
A .46ci (.00736L) RC car engine makes ~5 hp. That figures to 10.87 hp/ci or 679.34 hp/liter.
So according to your logic, a sports car with a .46 RC car engine making 5 hp would be superior because it has a better hp/liter ratio.
All hail the new king!! Now who wants to help me transplant this bad boy into my Regal so I can rule the streets? YES!
So according to your logic, a sports car with a .46 RC car engine making 5 hp would be superior because it has a better hp/liter ratio.
All hail the new king!! Now who wants to help me transplant this bad boy into my Regal so I can rule the streets? YES!
Registered User
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,947
From: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
this discussion has turned into a waste of time. akin to spitting facts into an ocean of mindless blithering.....
Making childish comments like, "have it @$$ handed to it"...or ..."kick it to the curb"...or "knock out punch"...is some of the "mindless blithering" that "turns" these discussions into pissing contests.
Especially when and if you find stats for both, you find the Vette is possibly down some ways better most others.., even though the TPi couldn't breathe well on top end.
0-60 = 5.9/ 6.0 favoring the TT-300z, and 14.5/14.6 1/4mile, favoring the Vette..
.91g skid pad = Vette, .88 for the Zcar.
70-0 mph braking: Vette 164ft, 300xz = 169 ft
Lap times: Vette = 138.2/ 300zx = 139.1
slalom: Vette 64.8mph, 300zx 69.6mph
Hardly a K.O....
As far as I remember, the 300Z tt was the worst of the Big NIPPON 3, (Supra tt, 300z tt, 3000GTVR4) performance wise...it was the Supra that was tough!
One of my best friends bought one NEW, a red 1990 300zx TT, tan Leather int, t-tops, Bose stereo sys, stick shift...I even test drove it with him and the salesman. He was from Thailand, and foreign cars were his thing.
$34K sticker.
And just as some said that the 300zxtt made GM raise the bar...GM's late '80's Grand National's/TTA's most likely did the same for Nissan.
I'm done.
Last edited by 90rocz; May 20, 2008 at 12:07 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,011
From: Exton, Pennsylvania
Talk about an argument of splitting hairs here. He is not the first, nor will he be the last to refer to engine size the volume of air/fuel mixture. Is he technically wrong? Perhaps. There is a size to speak of in engine displacement as a 5.7 liter engine displacements more, thus a larger amount, of air/fuel, than a 2.0 liter engine.
But when I read it, I knew exactly what he meant. And so did you guys.
But when I read it, I knew exactly what he meant. And so did you guys.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,011
From: Exton, Pennsylvania
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,209
the 300z tt knocked the vette on it's backside. like it or not. the vette of that year lost every single objective test it ran against the z. when you lose, you gotta eat crow, and the vette lost that for the years the z was made in the early 90's. even the lt1 vette was still inferior of the tt z.
In every year until 1993, the 300ZX TT was close to the Corvette in terms of acceleration. From that point forward, the Corvette was several tenths of second quicker to 60 MPH and in the 1/4 mile.
Handling-wise, the cars were near equal. The Corvette had a better 70-0 braking performance (164 ft. to 168 ft.), and both pulled around .9 G's (the Corvette had a slightly higher number). Kind of sad considering all the sophisticated suspension technology Nissan threw at the 300ZX.
The 300ZX may have been capable of running with an L98 Corvette. The LT1 'Vette was superior, however.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,011
From: Exton, Pennsylvania
Size, which is an English word, is defined as "the spatial dimensions, proportions, magnitude, or bulk of anything".
There is no way you still can argue this point. Perhaps engineering courses say differently, but that is irrelevant. Everyone knew what he meant, including you.
FWIW, I do not plan on responding to this thread after this.
There is no way you still can argue this point. Perhaps engineering courses say differently, but that is irrelevant. Everyone knew what he meant, including you.
FWIW, I do not plan on responding to this thread after this.
Last edited by RussStang; May 20, 2008 at 04:09 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 602
From: Alpharetta, GA
If we were in prison, I'd protect you in the shower.....er...uh...
