# My Breif 350z drive.



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

Around damp lanes of Lichfield yesterday in a friend's black (or v dark metallic - it was wet) and black 350Z. The interior was fine - although some of the trim not of a quality I'd choose. Controls nicely placed, spaced and weighted. Nice steering feel and gearchange. Easy to drive, although it felt a lot heavier than I imagined (don't know what the kerb weight is).

The engine is superb and I think anyone coming to this after a VAG 4 pot is really in for an aural treat. It sounds wonderful. Goes alright too - although the low end pick up is not as strong as I had imagined (been used to 380ft/lbs @ 2Krpm :wink: ) but this is no hard ship with the rev band and nice gear change. Top end zing is really nice and I'd say is better than the Audi 4.2 V8 in that respect.

Turn in is really good as is the front end grip and feedback. I didn't really push it - not being my car and it being v wet, but it has a great chassis. Eons better than the TTs  . In series of slow 2nd gear bends and on a couple of roundabouts, it was easy to control and slide the rear end. In that respect it reminded me of the M3. Ultimate grip and traction were more than adequate (i think it was on Bridgestones) and I wouldn't imagine a quattro driving too far away from a hard driven 350z in the wet.

Brakes are one of the cars strengths - plenty of feel and bite plus ultimate stopping power - and I had to be quite brutal to kick in the ABS.

Stereo not bad.

Overall impressed. Somewhat of a bargain at the price. #2 of Â£30K ish sports coupes I have driven - after the Boxster.

I'd like to do some more miles in the dry to see what it's higher speed grip and balance is like- good I suspect.

Nice package. Good value. Put the badge snobbery to one side....


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Nice review, Gary...

Interesting to read your opinions, as I know you've driven a fair amount of metal, including on track.

Your opinion of the interior was interesting too, as it is pretty similar to mine.

Ditto the engine - although mine's had the airbox removed and a much louder filter added, which frees up even more noise (but not in a chav way).

Hard to disagree with any of what you say, although I am surprised you thought the stereo was "OK". Its certainly louder than the TT Coupe and even the TT Roadster, but I feel the sub enclosure needs work, as it can sound rather hollow sometimes... as a known audiophile, I would have expected you to comment 

Correct about the chassis - its a drifting car, not one that will just snap and change direction...

It isn't, however, a Coupe - and neither is the Boxster  :lol:

The offer of a spin out around Hatfield is still there if you want to whet your appetite some more


----------



## scavenger (Jun 25, 2002)

A friend of mine has just ordered one, fully spec'd up it is Â£35k  (GT Pack/Nizmo's/Sat nav etc etc - me thinks he thought you had to tick every box on the options form :roll: )

Has to wait till November before it arrives but looking forward to having a go in it.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

scavenger said:


> A friend of mine has just ordered one, fully spec'd up it is Â£35k  (GT Pack/Nizmo's/Sat nav etc etc - me thinks he thought you had to tick every box on the options form :roll: )
> 
> Has to wait till November before it arrives but looking forward to having a go in it.


There has to be some bodykit on it for that money. Even with SatNav, mine would have come in under Â£30k! (And there were really no more factory options - just a few dealer accessories!)


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

jampott said:


> Nice review, Gary...
> 
> Interesting to read your opinions, as I know you've driven a fair amount of metal, including on track.
> 
> ...


Cheers Tim. I do try to keep an open mind sometimes, although it can be hard to overcome some prejudices about Jap cars. The main thing that struck me was that it felt 'right' from the outset, and I think that's highly important in a car.

Have you tracked it yet? It'd be nice to take it somewhere with good run offs and let it have it's head. I am a little circumspect at high speed tail-out stuff on the public highway, but all the positive signs are there.

It's probably been quite intersting for you having a busy wet winter commuting in a powerful RWD car. I think they improve one's driving (or at least dyanamic understanding of the car) no end.

As for the hi fi - I didn't really crank it and only listened with engine off and not to my choice of sounds (it was Scissor Sisters) but it's certainly better than the A4 or TT Boses I have had and heard. An active sub (or bigger one) might enable the mounted speakers to work better and fill the sound in. But I was actually enjoying the _basso profundo_ V8 bass more, which I have to say sounds great from the outside on the over run.

Looked good in the dark colour too. On the interiors, Audi are still tops when it comes to materials and fit and finish, so we have been a little spoiled in that respect.

Anyone thinking of a change from a TT or similar, should drive one.

Only thing was that pesky 330D driven by my mate, that was never far behind. :wink:


----------



## TankTop (May 28, 2003)

garyc said:


> Nice package. Good value. Put the badge snobbery to one side....


Already have, got one arriving in September 

A 4-day loan of a Zed was enough to convince me I needed one - just as a 3-second glance at a TT in 1999 convinced me I needed one of those too.

I'll certainly miss the Audi, best car Iâ€™ve owned to date by a mile. But, hand on heart, Iâ€™m even more excited by the prospect of the Zed arriving than the TT.

I'd agree about the slightly disappointing low end pick up, but the car I had was almost new so I don't know if that's something that improves as things loosen up a bit? Apart from that all I can find to criticise are itty bitty things like the flimsy fuel filler flap and free standing aerial (would much prefer it incorporated into the rear screen like the TT).

I thought the stereo was pretty good â€" did you drive a GT? (with the 240w Bose fitted).

Interior not as good as the TT (what is in this price bracket?), but certainly not deserving of some of the criticism thatâ€™s have been levelled at it. Great low down, comfy driving position and an open, airy feel to the cabin â€" even with black leather.

The drive is something else â€" nuff said, try it for yourself 

Personally Iâ€™m all for a bit of badge snobbery if it keeps the number of Zeds down :wink: but Iâ€™m sure if people deigned to try the Nissan theyâ€™d be very pleasantly surprised.

TankTop


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

Agree with the sentinments of this thread having driven my brothers 350Z recently. I was very impressed from the start with the excellent driving position. Here are a few further comments.

Agree the interior fit and finish is not TT quality but is pretty good. Will be interesting to see how the steering wheel decals wear.

As I have said elsewhere I think they have got the electronic aids spot on. I found you could get the rears spinning before the TC would subtly reign it in, same with the ABS.

Cornering was better than I was expecting as it looks 'heavy' but actually behaved quite nimbly.

The aerial is a bit of an afterthought, and my brother has already has his stolen.

Factory fit SarNav unit is excellent and the best I have used.

Overall, the best drive I've had since my old Mk1 Elise. Smile would get even bigger if you look at the standard equipment spec and the bargain price.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

I've not tracked it yet - but 17k miles on the Queen's highways have certainly been interesting, but it didn't take many of those miles to be "in tune" with it. My first sideways experience was on totally fresh tyres and it did get away from me quicker than I expected, but that is the 1 and only time it has EVER caught me out, and was literally on the drive back from the dealers....!! The rest of the sideways action has been asked for and delivered 

It has a 10" sub right behind the driver's seat (mounted in that bulkhead) - and when you crank it up, the effect is like having a "massage seat" fitted... :lol: Some stuff does sound pretty good through it, but I've always thought that the TT Bose (but even more so the Zed Bose) cannot handle guitar based music properly. Guns N Roses sounds really bad through it. Relative to Guns N Roses through a home setup, I mean...

As for colours, the blue does it for me everytime. However, you can't spec the Alezan (tango) leather with it, and that was my overriding decision. I love Black with Alezan, but not to own... and the Sunset I have is certainly a fine colour. If you like to stand out 

The most surprising thing is that, in the last 6 months, I'm the only TT owner on here to shift to one. Although 2 more have recently followed suit!!


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

BTW - no wear on my steering wheel. I've scratched the door pocket with my foot a few times, and the rear strut bar plastic is a bit prone to scratching if you lift things into the boot over it... but for me, the beauty of the interior is the simplicity and the ease of use. Things are just *there*. Just where you'd need them. Just "right"... I'll forgive a couple of knocks and cheaper plastics for that... No rattles, though, I hasten to add... by now, my TT had had more rattles than your average kindergarten!


----------



## amtechuk (Nov 17, 2003)

Stop it , stop it, stop it...........I want mine now :roll:

5 weeks and 3 days to go.

Oh go on then tease me some more :twisted:


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)




----------



## amtechuk (Nov 17, 2003)

B-E-A-U-T-I-F-U-LLLL 8)


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

I am not suprised there are no rattles as it certainly felt very solid and well put together. Ride was also pleasingly firm but no crashing over potholes.

My brother has the Azure Blue and I must admit it is a superb colour.

He is well cheesed off his aerial got nicked - got to ask why anyone would need a 350Z aerial.

Any issues with stonechips on the front? Apparently a possible 'issue' due to soft paint although I gather Nissan don't beleive there is a problem.

Overall, I wish I had one!


----------



## amtechuk (Nov 17, 2003)

350z ownership and armourfend go hand in hand, for the front bumper anyway :wink:


----------



## sonicmonkey (Mar 20, 2004)

The 350Z looks better every time I see it. Mmmmmm....... [smiley=idea.gif]

Nice pic Tim - being an owner of a 350Z for a few miles now, would you agree with Gary's comments regarding the weight of the car? It was one of the factors which made me ditch the M3 - fantastic bit of kit, but it couldn't shake off the "big" car feel for me.

I know the TT's no lightweight but if feels more nimble than it should given its weight. How does the Zed compare?

Cheers


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

Tim clearly has vastly more Z time so you may respect his opinion more, but I felt the Zed was suprisingly nimble - much more that I was expecting given its heavy, squat muscular image. Steering was positive and precise, and it never felt heavy or clumsy to hustle round corners. As I said above, I found it the best drive since my old Mk1 Elise - which was truly nimble.

IMHO of course.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

The Zed did feel quite "Big" when I first got it, but I wouldn't say its "heavy" - its actually a similar weight to the TT itself (I think around 1525kg for my spec) - but the key is the 53:47 weight distrubution, which is 50:50 under acceleration... 

Looking in the engine bay, its also plain to see that the engine is set in a completely different place to the Audi TT V6 - its a lot further back relative to the front axle...

... Big? Yeah, maybe... but when you've put a few miles on (and not that many, I'll add...) it just feels right...

I think its about 20cm longer than a TT, and possible a couple of mm wider. Its lower, I think... from having seen them lined up together....

The other thing that makes it feel big... you actually sit bang in the centre (front to rear) of the car - another good reason for not bothering with rear seats. I think the distance from seated position to front of bumper is longer than the Audi TT - partly because the car itself is 20cm longer, but mostly because the seating position is simply further back, and this gives more room to place that engine... 

The precision of the chassis, once you get used to driving it, means that the size and weight of the car really aren't apparent when you're actually bimbling along.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

BTW - for any of you at Brooklands, I'll be there with the Zed. Subject to anything else that is going on, if anyone wants a closer look, or maybe even a drive if circumstances allow, by all means come and find me. I'll happily show you around it...


----------



## LeeS3 (Mar 24, 2004)

A few questions..

Did any of you zed owners considered the Nismo s-tune pack? And what conclusions did you come too? I gather you can have them imported factory s-tuned up.. Which gives numerous goodies (as described by evo - do a search on their website) but essential is a 300bhp version! Or you can have a NISMO dealer retro fit it..

Also how did you buy them? Via a nissan dealer or using a broker? What all this stuff about UK allocation ect, etc..


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

LeeS3 said:


> A few questions..
> 
> Did any of you zed owners considered the Nismo s-tune pack? And what conclusions did you come too? I gather you can have them imported factory s-tuned up.. Which gives numerous goodies (as described by evo - do a search on their website) but essential is a 300bhp version! Or you can have a NISMO dealer retro fit it..
> 
> Also how did you buy them? Via a nissan dealer or using a broker? What all this stuff about UK allocation ect, etc..


TBH. the Nismo S-Tune pack doesn't seem to add that much to the car - at least not for the money... The bodykit is nice, but you can't buy the exhaust in the UK anyway (at least not as a dealer option) so I doubt you can really buy a Nismo S-Tune 350z in the UK anyway...

A few guys fit some of the bits retrospectively, but AFAIK noone has changed the handling parts yet, partly because they were designed for the Jap spec car which doesn't handle as well as the UK one anyway...

UK allocation is tricky. Only about 2000 cars per year at the moment, and the imports aren't UK spec.

I bought from a UK main dealer (Glyn Hopkin in Chelmsford) and was lucky to pick up a cancelled order of the exact spec I was after, which meant 2 week leadtime, not 2 months (now even longer, I fear...)


----------



## poseidon91 (Aug 1, 2004)

I dont know how anyone can compare a TT to a 350 Z. I mean the TT starts at what the Z adds up to with everything in it. The Z is a fairly attractive car, but the inside is CHEAP!!! looking as can be, I mean if your going to compare the Z to any other cars it should be to ones that are in its class like a mustang or S 2000. The plush inside of the TT and the details of the seats and trim blow the Z away. Its one thing to compare the TT and Z to performance, but its another thing to compare class and engineering to it. I mean not to bash Z owners, but the best way I can put it is it's a NISSAN compared to an Audi. Nuff said!


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

poseidon91 said:


> I dont know how anyone can compare a TT to a 350 Z. I mean the TT starts at what the Z adds up to with everything in it. The Z is a fairly attractive car, but the inside is CHEAP!!! looking as can be, I mean if your going to compare the Z to any other cars it should be to ones that are in its class like a mustang or S 2000. The plush inside of the TT and the details of the seats and trim blow the Z away. Its one thing to compare the TT and Z to performance, but its another thing to compare class and engineering to it. I mean not to bash Z owners, but the best way I can put it is it's a NISSAN compared to an Audi. Nuff said!


If you mean "price" when you say "The TT starts at what the Z adds up to with everything in it", you are pretty much wrong. The TT starts around Â£20k. The Zed at Â£24k+

Details of the seats in a TT? Pray tell - what are you talking about, fella? The TT seats aren't great to sit in (certainly compared to the S3 seats etc) and only have basic manual adjustments. Nor do they look good, unless you spec Baseball... So the TT has trim detailing? And? The Zed does too... and does the TT have controls laid out exactly where you'd want them? No, sorry...

Sorry, but it is a Nissan. The company responsible for one of THE most respected and easily tuned cars of the 1990s - and one that not even Porsche could beat for several years, EVEN ON THEIR OWN PROVING GROUND...

So you can keep your "plush" interiors and your Golf chasis. I'll take the driver's choice thanks


----------



## b3ves (May 6, 2002)

jampott said:


> The most surprising thing is that, in the last 6 months, I'm the only TT owner on here to shift to one. Although 2 more have recently followed suit!!


Too many badge snobs, too few driving enthusiasts 

I've still yet to drive one, but definitely high on my admired sub-Â£30K cars list.


----------



## b3ves (May 6, 2002)

poseidon91 said:


> Its one thing to compare the TT and Z to performance, but its another thing to compare class and engineering to it.


Which TT - the one with the VW, Seat or Skoda engine?


----------



## Carlos (May 6, 2002)

poseidon91 said:


> I dont know how anyone can compare a TT to a 350 Z. I mean the TT starts at what the Z adds up to with everything in it. The Z is a fairly attractive car, but the inside is CHEAP!!! looking as can be, I mean if your going to compare the Z to any other cars it should be to ones that are in its class like a mustang or S 2000. The plush inside of the TT and the details of the seats and trim blow the Z away. Its one thing to compare the TT and Z to performance, but its another thing to compare class and engineering to it. I mean not to bash Z owners, but the best way I can put it is it's a NISSAN compared to an Audi. Nuff said!


One of the most inaccurate posts I've ever read. Has Vlastan changed his user name? Or is it Vagman's alter ego?

I have sat in a Z a couple of times, and I'll admit that it isn't quite up to TT standards in terms of design, but its still a nice place to be (miles nicer than RX-8 ).

350z not in the TT's class? You're right there, but not in the way you think.

FWIW I owned two TTs, loved them to bits. I will probably never own a 350z. However I do find the blinkered goons hammering one out over their TT brochure a little irritating :evil:


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

b3ves said:


> poseidon91 said:
> 
> 
> > Its one thing to compare the TT and Z to performance, but its another thing to compare class and engineering to it.
> ...




I guess you are an honorary member of the "jap" owners club, seeing as what is under your bonnet


----------



## jdn (Aug 26, 2002)

To add my tuppence worth...

Before I had a spin in my brothers 350Z my preconception was that the interior would be the real let-down having seen poor quality fit and finish in other Japanese motors.

I was pleasantly suprised to find that - in my view - the interior was really rather good. No rattles, creaks, shakes or crashes on driving. Nice postive controls, nothing too flimsy.

I think it is fair to say that it is not up to the standard of the Audi interior, but comes close. A few parts that would be aluminium on the TT are colured plastic, but they don't intrude.

I came away impressed with the interior, mainly because it was better than I thought it would be due to my innacurate preconceptions.


----------



## jusTTin_D (May 19, 2002)

> The most surprising thing is that, in the last 6 months, I'm the only TT owner on here to shift to one. Although 2 more have recently followed suit!!


i made the switch about 4 months ago, although i had my eye on the car from concept a few years back, i finally placed an order back in november, and got the car in march. 
TBH, after the initial honeymoon period of the first few weeks of ownership things about the car started to grate on me. firstly Nissan have stylised the cars interior well and it _looks_ clean and unfussy, but it definately has a cheap feel to it, which for me spoils part of the driving experience. if i'm paying close to 30k for a car, i really want it to feel like a quality car, which sadly it never did. as for boot / luggage space it's pretty much non existant due to the rear strut brace and it's large plastic casing. now, i know why it's there, to help strengthen etc etc, but surely they could have come up with a better way to encompass it into the car. another thing that was beginning to annoy me was the drone of the engine note, and im shocked as it was a major selling point when i test drove the car. i initiallly loved the grunt from the exhaust, but after a few months it just became a little tiresome, ok it was loud, but it just didn't have any urgency.
don't get me wrong, the car does have good points. the gearbox is wonderful, a very short shift, and a pleasure to use. the car's also great for a quick blast, whenever you feel the need to let off some steam, handles great at speed and corners very well. i also loved the Bose system as comes with the GT pack upgrade. much better than the TT's Bose.
but sadly none of this was enough for me to keep the car longer than 4 months. i knew i was going to change it sooner rather than later so i decided to get out while the going is still good for residuals. so swapped it for a 2 year old E46 M3 coupe. i don't want to go into too many details about it now but after only 1 week one word best describes it, _awesome_.

i don't want to h8 on anybodies car, but i just thought as i'd made the switch from TT to Z i would add my thoughts about the car - ok for a quick blast but hard to live with as a daily driver.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

jusTTin_D said:


> > The most surprising thing is that, in the last 6 months, I'm the only TT owner on here to shift to one. Although 2 more have recently followed suit!!
> 
> 
> i made the switch about 4 months ago, although i had my eye on the car from concept a few years back, i finally placed an order back in november, and got the car in march.
> ...


Wow! 

obviously not the car for you, but horses for course I expect (as W7PMC would say...)

After 18k miles (2nd service being done today) I still love the engine note and exhaust, and find it an EASIER daily driver than the TT. Why? The seating position lends itself to cruising, and the "lazy" torque of the engine makes for pretty effortless driving. But I guess one man's meat is another's poison...


----------



## raven (May 7, 2002)

jampott said:


> .....and your Golf chasis....


[smiley=zzz.gif]


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

raven said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> > .....and your Golf chasis....
> ...


I'm allowed to say that in here because:

a) this is "Other Marques"
b) its true :-*


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Actually the cars don't have a chassis they have a floor pan and the TT only shares 20% of it with the Golf.

But hey lets not let facts get in the way of some fun banter. :roll: :wink:


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

scoTTy said:


> Actually the cars don't have a chassis they have a floor pan and the TT only shares 20% of it with the Golf.
> 
> But hey lets not let facts get in the way of some fun banter. :roll: :wink:


Ok, it has the engine from a Golf, the switch gear from a Skoda and the air vent trims from a Rover 

It shares the same floorplan as the Seat Leon, the old Audi A3, the VW Golf MK IV and (to a certain extent) the new Beetle. There's probably a Skoda in there somewhere as well...

Designed by an American for a German company, but built in Hungary.

Fun, though... all the same


----------



## poseidon91 (Aug 1, 2004)

I dont know if anyone is aware of this or not, but the Z shares the same engine with almost every car that nissan makes. So basically if you want the same engine note, you can get in any car made by nissan (with the exception of like 2 or 3 cars) thats why their so cheap because they all use the same parts! . So Raven and jampott can keep your piece plastic japanese cookie cutters. :lol:


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

poseidon91 said:


> I dont know if anyone is aware of this or not, but the Z shares the same engine with almost every car that nissan makes. So basically if you want the same engine note, you can get in any car made by nissan (with the exception of like 2 or 3 cars) thats why their so cheap because they all use the same parts! . So Raven and jampott can keep your piece plastic japanese cookie cutters. :lol:


Go on then, name them...

I think the Murano has it (not available yet over here) and the Skyline 350GT gets it too (and deserves it).

Almera? Nope. Primera? Nope. Micra? Nope. X-trail? Nope. Bluebird? Nope. Sunny? Nope. 300ZX? Nope? 200SX? Nope. Warrior? Nope. I'm running out of Nissans here, you'd better put me out of my misery and tell me...

Its an old and reliable engine - its about 10 years old (or so) - so I'm not surprised that Nissan have used it in previous cars. Renault even pinched a watered down version for their Vel Satis.

Not many Nissans throw out 287bhp from a 3500cc V6. Ergo not many use the same engine...


----------



## saint (Dec 6, 2002)

Must admit that I do quite like the look of 'em - though it would be nice to have the TT interior in there......


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

saint said:


> Must admit that I do quite like the look of 'em - though it would be nice to have the TT interior in there......


Except "bigger". The TT seems much smaller inside these days.


----------



## saint (Dec 6, 2002)

Maybe time to brave the sales patter and go for a test drive.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

saint said:


> Maybe time to brave the sales patter and go for a test drive.


You've got nowt to lose... if you don't need the meagre +2 rear seats of a TT, the 350z is a great alternative. Obviously not to everyone's taste, but I would strongly suggest the handling and performance will make you think more about the fun you are having driving, rather than the "special" interior you are leaving behind.

I've said it before, but personally - having had a TT for almost 3 years, the interior in the Zed is a nice change. Fit and finish are adequate and style is very good. More than that, its very ergonomic and roomy even for someone 6'4" and the wrong side of 250lbs... It looks nothing like the TT inside, but for me thats a bonus. For others, its a major flaw...


----------



## Alchemist (Feb 11, 2004)

jampott said:


> poseidon91 said:
> 
> 
> > I dont know if anyone is aware of this or not, but the Z shares the same engine with almost every car that nissan makes. So basically if you want the same engine note, you can get in any car made by nissan (with the exception of like 2 or 3 cars) thats why their so cheap because they all use the same parts! . So Raven and jampott can keep your piece plastic japanese cookie cutters. :lol:
> ...


Jampott, let me put you out of your misery.

NISSAN QX.

Before you start jumping up and down proclaiming it is not true, this information is from my nearest Nissan dealer.

Alchemist.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Alchemist said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> > poseidon91 said:
> ...


Ahh yes - the "executive" model that barely sold over here (was it really sold?)

But if that is REALLY all you could come up with... its hardly:



> but the Z shares the same engine with almost every car that nissan makes.


... is it?

(which was the point I was trying to make - that it probably IS used in other Nissans (being a 10 year old engine design!) but not quite as prevalent as the OP would have us believe...)

Nice that its been around a bit, too. Unlike (say) the engine in the Mazda RX-8 which sounds like a complete fuel/oil nightmare. I'd rather have 10 year old 3.5L V6 power than brand new wankel technology which is hardly fuel efficient, and needs the bonnet open to change oil just about every other time you fill with petrol...


----------



## R6B TT (Feb 25, 2003)

jampott said:


> saint said:
> 
> 
> > Must admit that I do quite like the look of 'em - though it would be nice to have the TT interior in there......
> ...


Well the TT's the same size mate, you must be putting on a growth spurt!


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

R6B TT said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> > saint said:
> ...


Nah, I'm more used to the Roadster which does have more headroom... sitting in a Coupe for an extended period, I felt right up against the ceiling, even with the seat lowered!

It does seem smaller width ways, and the driver / passenger part of the cabin is certainly smaller than in the 350z. Maybe due to the amount of the TT interior taken up with the big "shelf" of dashboard which seems to extend forever away from the windscreen


----------



## Alchemist (Feb 11, 2004)

jampott said:


> Alchemist said:
> 
> 
> > jampott said:
> ...


Oh dear, oh dear Jampott, didn't mean to touch a nerve, just stating a Nissan dealer fact. If it hurts ......... tough.

It was not an opportunity for me to have a go at the 350Z, in fact I quite like it, but if you wish to take that tone about the RX8 (and you know I've got one), then let me assist in educating you, just a little.

The RX8 engine is a development of the previous RX7 engine (minus the twin sequential turbos) with the addition of better placed porting, adding to the life of rotor seals (now 120k miles).

As for the Petrol/Oil nightmare you mention, I've done 7K miles and checked my oil level seven times (do the maths). In that time I've put in 4 litres of oil (at a cost of Â£4/litre) which has cost me Â£16 and will probably cost me no more than Â£40 for the year. Not bad compared to having an oil change every 6 months (which is what I had to do with my 200SX) as the oil is kept fresh.

Mpg - I get between 22 (urban and thrashing it) to 28 on longer runs. Not a problem for me, and I hope not a problem for you.

Alchemist.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Alchemist said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> > Alchemist said:
> ...


No nerve touched there at all... just pointing out the innaccuracies of the OP, that's all - and you missed the point entirely.

4 litres of oil in 7k miles does sound a fair amount, however you look at it. However, it is also fair to say you are getting better than average oil consumption (and fuel economy) so count yourself lucky, my friend.

The biggest problem with the rotar engine seems to be the extremes it can generate. Some seem to run perfectly reliably and consume very little oil, and return almost decent fuel economy. But if the reports are true, a fair number suffer from pretty major problems, and end up costing a lot to maintain because fuel economy and oil consumption tend towards the extreme...

The rotary engine is a nice idea, but hasn't yet acheived proper market penetration. In the days of "engine" and "platform" swapping between parent and child companies, you have you ask yourself why (if the rotary engine is so bloody great) Ford haven't launched it in one of their own models yet?


----------



## Alchemist (Feb 11, 2004)

There are extremes in all cars. Some Zeds are posting less than 20 mpg, whilst some are posting 30+mpg. Hows yours?

Simple fact Ford won't use the rotary (not yet anyway) is because of economics. Ford is still in some financial dire straits and the rotary is a sophisticated (and expensive) piece of machinery. Ford is still run by "bean counters".

Most new cars have there problems, the RX8 has had surprisingly few, and most require minimal dealer attention. How about the Zed?

Alchemist.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Alchemist said:


> There are extremes in all cars. Some Zeds are posting less than 20 mpg, whilst some are posting 30+mpg. Hows yours?
> 
> Simple fact Ford won't use the rotary (not yet anyway) is because of economics. Ford is still in some financial dire straits and the rotary is a sophisticated (and expensive) piece of machinery. Ford is still run by "bean counters".
> 
> ...


I dunno of any posting less than 20mpg, except when purely driven around town, or when thrashed endlessly (or modded)... How's mine? Somewhere above 26mpg at the moment. 19k miles. Not a drop of oil (well, 2 full service oil changes, but no actual "consumption")

The Zed has (AFAIK) zero known mechanical issues requiring dealer attention - none that spring to mind, anyway. There are some issues with paint peeling / chipping easily, and mine is actually at the dealers today to fix a known "creak" where to panels have insufficient clearance - but its hardly the same tales told by a few RX8 which seem to be suffering from seized engines etc. In 19k miles, 1 diagnosed panel creak (with a known and documented solution) is more than acceptable in terms of warranty work.

By this stage, in comparison, my TT was creaking like an arthritic old granny, the handbrake had let itself off (causing Â£500 of damage on one occasion, but caught in time the other 2 or 3), the dash pod was starting to play up, the windows were dropping of their own accord, and the dealer network had p*ssed me off to such an extent that I was struggling to find a reliable and decent dealer...


----------



## Alchemist (Feb 11, 2004)

jampott said:


> Alchemist said:
> 
> 
> > There are extremes in all cars. Some Zeds are posting less than 20 mpg, whilst some are posting 30+mpg. Hows yours?
> ...


I know of no one with a seized RX8 engine :?:

19K miles and 2 services already! What are the service intervals?

So japanese cars are more reliable than german ones. Nothing new there then.

Alchemist.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Alchemist said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> > Alchemist said:
> ...


The service interval on a Zed is 9k miles...


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Alchemist said:


> jampott said:
> 
> 
> > Alchemist said:
> ...


Ok, lets talk about the RX8 engine...

The Independent reviews the car quite well, but points out (on several occasions) petrol and oil consumption issues, and reliability problems with the engine. They point to "CAR" magazine running one as a long term test car, and quote:



> Car magazine has had one on long-term test and reported the usual alarming oil and petrol thirst and erratic performance, all of which indicates that RX8's are for dedicated owners only.


The full review can be found at: http://motoring.independent.co.uk/road_ ... ory=536829

Note the word "usual" appearing in the quote. Seemingly they are not talking about an extreme incident, but normal behaviour.

Autoexpress had one as a long termer also... they love the performance, the handling and the car itself - however, quote:



> But the biggest drawback to RX-8 ownership comes at the fuel pump, as the high heat loss in rotary engines means poor economy. And that's certainly been the case with our car, with a heavy average consumption of 18.8mpg.


(This is on top of them saying



> There are compromises with the rotary power, too. Firstly, there's a fairly healthy consumption of oil - just over three litres already. Synthetic lube isn't cheap, either, but the biggest annoyance is the location of the dipstick.
> 
> Unfortunately for a vehicle that needs its levels checking regularly, finding the Mazda's dipstick involves reaching into the depths of the engine bay. Not only does this mean scratching your knuckles, but extracting the dipstick without brushing it against things on the way up is also a challenge. All of which means getting an accurate idea of the oil level is a long-winded process and, should you need a top up, the plastic engine cover has to be removed to gain access to the filler cap.


So not great, really...

Don't Mazda also recommend you run the engine for at least 15 minutes every time you start it up?

Problems also with flooding of the engine?

http://www.rx8ownersclub.co.uk seems to document quite a number of performance related problems which have involved people taking the cars back to the dealers for investigation, having been "spanked" by normal cars....

We Zed boys do have issues - sure. Mainly the paint I've already mentioned- but noone is complaining of any other engine / mechanical / performance issues other than in a totally isolated, single case sort of problem (unlike TT coil packs, dash pods, DSG gearboxes etc)


----------



## Alchemist (Feb 11, 2004)

To go away and do all that research proves I have touched a nerve with you Jampott. You need to liven up there a bit fella before you are sucked into your own hype.

Fuel consumption - look here;

http://350zuk.com/forums/index.php?s=97 ... 1961&st=45

Now I can only speak about my car, and this my experience.

Flooding - had none, ever. Mazda has updated the ECU software and anyone wanting it (free of course) drives into the dealer and drives out 10 minutes later. The new M flash leans out the startup fueling. As for running the car for 10 minutes :lol: , I regularly move my car around my driveway, so its on and off within 30 seconds (and I don't have the M flash). Guess what still no flooding.

Also the car is meant to use semi not fully synthetic, hence alot cheaper to run. Including service intervals at 12.5K miles, means it has longer intervals than a Zed.

As far as being spanked :lol: (chav term if I ever heard one) not happened to me as I don't go looking for races, and certainly have nothing to prove.

Now, whilst I go about the rest of my life (looking after kids in the school holiday, you understand), when I return, I may become as sad as you a do the "research" on the Zed. Buckle up :wink:

Alchemist.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Alchemist said:


> To go away and do all that research proves I have touched a nerve with you Jampott. You need to liven up there a bit fella before you are sucked into your own hype.
> 
> Fuel consumption - look here;
> 
> ...


it proves I had 10 minutes to spare to do a quick Google search and paste the results for you to see. All of the quotes came from the first 10 hits of my seach. Easy, really...

As for your 350zuk.com quote. SqueakyZ (Mark, the site admin) was laughing when he said about 18mpg. I think he'd been having a good time, don't you? 

Flooding? Don't really care whether you've suffered or not. Others have. The engine is prone to do it. Its unreliable. QED. I thought you implied the Mazda didn't have any issues which required a trip back to the dealer? By your own admission, they've updated the ECU programming and you have to go to a dealer to get this updated!! :lol: 

Zed service intervals are fine. 9k is about right for oil changes. Oh, I forget - you change oil about every other fuel stop 

"spanking"... yeah, that was the exact term I got from the rx8ownersclub site where the chap had taken his car back to the dealer because it was underpeforming. In his own words, he'd been spanked by a number of cars, including a TT :roll: Maybe it is a chav term. As it is a direct quote from the RX8 owner, I guess you are calling RX8 owners chavs. Fair comment :wink:

As it happens, fella, I *have* to sit here at my PC for most of the day. I can take a few minutes out of my laid back working schedule to counter your argument that the RX8 is a reliable, economical car. Believe it or not, I'm getting (over)paid to sit here and argue with you. Beats doing it in my spare time which you are obviously doing.

You have kids... lucky old you. I guess that ruled the Zed out of the purchasing decision then. A shame really, as (but for that) you'd be driving one...


----------



## Alchemist (Feb 11, 2004)

You are a very touchy little person aren't you? From your OWN request asking what other application was the Zed engine used, I answered correctly. Since then you have been caught out and hate it. Tough luck, live with it, and you'll be stronger person.

Now get with the real world. You've got a nice car, I've got a nice car. If you look back a few posts I state I actually like the Zed, thats because I like cars. You, unfortunately seem hell bent on putting the RX8 down. Indeed a Zed was considered by me but as you realise, I needed to make an unselfish discussion, and plump for the RX8. Besides I'd rather have my kids than a Zed.

When you finally remove your head from your a**e you will realise that there is space for types of cars on the road. Just don't believe you own all of it.

Alchemist.


----------

