# The Zed up close .........



## garvin (May 7, 2002)

In the run up to the replacement for the TT later this year I went for a test drive today in one of the top â€˜contendersâ€™ on my list â€" the 350Z. An interesting experience. From the good road test press it has been given I was pretty much convinced that an example in Azure blue with charcoal leather interior, GT pack and Rays alloys was the car for me. I really wanted to like this car but â€¦â€¦.. well â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦ just couldnâ€™t. It just didnâ€™t feel at all special although it got a lot of attention from the local youth I passed â€" the right sort of attention I might add â€¦â€¦â€¦.. waving, cheering and thumbs up etc. However, when climbing out of the car after the drive it didnâ€™t leave me with that â€˜wowâ€™ factor â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦. In fact, I actually felt disappointed and canâ€™t put my finger on exactly why! Thatâ€™s the subjective bit, now for the objective bit :-

Good points  :-

*Acceleration :* Take off from rest leaves the TT for dead up to 30mph or so. Once up to speed I wouldnâ€™t have said there was much difference in performance between it and my TT. Switch off the traction control, grab a boot full of revs and drop the clutch â€¦â€¦â€¦.. not for a long time have I driven a powerful rear wheel drive car and â€˜snakedâ€™ away leaving a couple of black tram-lines behind.
*Deceleration :* The anchors are tremendous â€" pulls up very nicely and repeatedly from high speed with no sign of fade or squirming and good pedal feel. Gave lots of confidence â€" puts the TT brakes to shame.
*Handling and grip :* Very, very good. Lots of oversteer available if and when you want it but quite controllable and relatively easy to drive quick on the limit. No discernible â€˜pitchingâ€™ and felt really well planted. Felt sharper than the TT in that there was no initial understeer, so turn in was very good â€¦â€¦â€¦. but did not feel any quicker through the twisty bits for it. You can get into bends quicker in this car but you canâ€™t get on the throttle when exiting as quick.
*Steering :* Very nice, precise and accurate with good feel.
*Engine sound :* Glorious â€" a real â€˜sonorousâ€™ engine noise â€" much better to listen to than the 225 TT engine (but maybe on a par with the V6TT)
*Gear change :* Fabulous. Short throw and very quick and clean.

Bad points  :-

*Seating :* Driverâ€™s seat does not go far enough back for me so my knees are bent a bit more than is ideal and the seat squab would not adjust enough to bring the front of the seat up to provide sufficient support. Interestingly, the show room car had two adjusters on the seat squab - one to higher/lower the front of the seat and one to higher/lower the back of the seat â€" whereas the demo car had only one adjuster for the front of the seat. I did feel that I could get the show room car seating better but it was certainly not an ideal driving position.
*Steering Wheel :* No adjustment for reach and so with the seat fully back I felt the wheel was just an inch or so too far away.
*Instruments and trim :* The more I drove the car the more â€˜naffâ€™ I thought they were and the more the interior came over as â€˜cheapâ€™.
*Air Con :* On Auto setting it felt feeble to say the least and today was not particularly warm. I had to keep switching to manual and winding the fans right up to cool the interior down sufficiently. Unfortunately the fans are very noisy and reverting back to the â€˜autoâ€™ setting, even with the temperature set at its lowest, resulted in the temperature rising again very quickly.
*Transmission :* Extremely noisy and the vibration through the gear lever was something I have not experienced for a very long time (and I have driven many, many cars over the years). Stationary with the clutch depressed, the noise of the V6 engine is glorious but as soon as the clutch was let up in neutral the gear lever buzzed away and the noise of the input shafts rotating started to compete with the engine â€" a bad example perhaps, but this car had only done some 2.5k miles. Iâ€™m afraid the transmission noise at cruising speed was a great disappointment, almost â€˜agriculturalâ€™ I might say â€" it would get very wearing on the motorway for a journey of any distance.

Finally, the TT felt a much more â€˜qualityâ€™ car when I got back in it and the NVH for a car some 21/2 years old and 36,000 miles on the clock was much less than the â€˜newâ€™ 350Z!

So, in summary, a car that just does not â€˜do itâ€™ for me and has a few too many important flaws â€" so back to the contenders list for a re-think :?


----------



## Jac-in-a-Box (Nov 9, 2002)

That's a nice write up Garvin...and in much more technical terms than I can manage  Though I think I can relate to, and agree with most of your report.

I recently tried a 350Z in the same colour as your test ride. 
Tried it in the wet with a salesman who admitted "he didn't know too much" about the cars - in it's self a shame, the Nissan deserved to be marketed by someone with a bit more knowledge.

I walked away from it feeling that it didn't offer the same "stability" as the TT, I know it's rear wheel drive - but so is the Boxster; that felt as secure and confidence inspiring as my TT.
I managed an alarming takeoff from a roundabout in the wet and ended up snaking up the road (I assume the traction control was off?) 
Just felt it was too much of a handful for me.

At the end of the day I just don't think it would make want to look over my shoulder, and give it a last loving look as I walked away.

I'm sure it has many merits, just not for me

Jackie x


----------



## SBJ (Jun 29, 2002)

Nice road test report. I looked at the 350Z in a showroom the other month after seeing ZHead's at a Kneesworth meet a couple of months back. The fit/finish/build quality is nowhere near that of the TT's. The switch gear inside felt imprecise and the plastics looked cheap. The engine bay was messy with no engine covers. The rear hatch/boot didn't even have a grab handle on the underside!

As a new design it's not supprising that it's getting some good road test reports, but the interior looked poorly thought out, trying to make it look like a quality product with bits of aluminium. I remember having a test drive in the new MR2, and it was like going back 10 years. Very cheap looking plastics. Think that many Japanese cars suffer this problem.

SBJ


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Very good road test report. I can't really disagree with any of it...

As an overall "experience", I think you get out of the Zed what you put into it. You aren't buying german plastics or european styling. You are, however, buying japanese performance and reliability.

I must say (in its defence) that I find the seating in the Zed to be wonderful. I'm a large chap (6'4" and pretty big to go with it) and there is plenty of legroom, bags of headroom and shoulder room, and the seating position I have puts the gear lever and steering wheel exactly where I'd want them to be. I find the seat itself very supportive, but would agree that there is way more movement in (say) an RX8 seat. My Zed only has basically 3 way movement...

The AirCon in mine is OK too... I've not noticed it being too warm or too cold, although the car does did seem prone to condensation in the winter, but that was soon blown away in the mornings...

To me, the lack of a grab handle, the lack of a full engine cover, the slightly more "plastic" interior are all things I can easily "overlook" because living with the car on a daily basis, its much more of a fun car than a TT Coupe and (dare I say it) more fun than a TT Roadster too - the only thing I miss is the open top...


----------



## jgoodman00 (May 6, 2002)

> Air Con : On Auto setting it felt feeble to say the least and today was not particularly warm. I had to keep switching to manual and winding the fans right up to cool the interior down sufficiently. Unfortunately the fans are very noisy and reverting back to the â€˜autoâ€™ setting, even with the temperature set at its lowest, resulted in the temperature rising again very quickly.


Does it have a solar sensor? 
The Boxster a/c does, & it can sometimes lead you to believe it has a mind of its own. According to Porsche, light plays an important part in temperature perception, so in the Boxster it modifies the actual temperature based on your specified temp & the data received from the solar sensor...


----------



## garvin (May 7, 2002)

jgoodman00 said:


> Does it have a solar sensor?


Not that I'm aware of. The ambient temperature at the time was 19degC and conditions were sunny - it was the effect of the sun that caused the cabin temperature to rise quickly, I could feel it on my face - probably because the 'glass' in the 'zed' is not 'reflective' like the TT glass. I raised the issue with the salesman back at the dealers and we went through the 'procedure' for setting the air con to 'auto' just to check I hadn't got anything wrong - which it appears I hadn't and seemed to be confirmed as all the right indicator lights for 'auto' were illuminated. The only other explanation is that the 'auto' function of the air con was not working correctly ............. in which case so much for Jampott's assertion that the Zed is about Japanese _reliability_ as well as performance :?


----------



## jgoodman00 (May 6, 2002)

garvin said:


> jgoodman00 said:
> 
> 
> > Does it have a solar sensor?
> ...


Ahh, ok. That does sound the reverse of the Boxster. As a rule if its sunny then the a/c feels freezing. It will be interesting to see how it copes with a warm summer evening...


----------



## jam (May 8, 2002)

the more i see the zed, the more I like it to be honest, it's really growing on me, especially in black and it looks very smart indeed. haven't seen the interior, has anyone got any pics?

i can see why people are going for them and why they are turning heads and I think that if they had a german badge on and were still the same car, they wouldn't get half the flack that they do, which is a sad state of affairs really. i don't think most people who consider the zed see it as a nissan (me included) but more a 'Z' car which has nothing in common with other nissans apart from the little silver badge!

shame they do because, even though i haven't driven one, many of you guys on here have and i've heard nothing but good reports

just my 2 penneth

cheers

James


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

jam said:


> the more i see the zed, the more I like it to be honest, it's really growing on me, especially in black and it looks very smart indeed. haven't seen the interior, has anyone got any pics?
> 
> i can see why people are going for them and why they are turning heads and I think that if they had a german badge on and were still the same car, they wouldn't get half the flack that they do, which is a sad state of affairs really. i don't think most people who consider the zed see it as a nissan (me included) but more a 'Z' car which has nothing in common with other nissans apart from the little silver badge!
> 
> ...


yup, yup and yup.

delivery times are now September. Demand is strong.

Autoexpress (this week) lists the 3yr residuals higher than a 225TT and in the same ballpark as the 3.2V6 - so it does appear that the market at least doesn't see this as a lemon.

We aren't without our problems, however. Many of us are reporting excessive stone chipping and "soft paint" - but no mechanical issues at all to speak of.

My NISMO exhaust arrives very shortly...


----------



## jam (May 8, 2002)

jampott said:


> jam said:
> 
> 
> > the more i see the zed, the more I like it to be honest, it's really growing on me, especially in black and it looks very smart indeed. haven't seen the interior, has anyone got any pics?
> ...


got any interior pics of yours tim?


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Not to hand. I can take some at the weekend, but TBH mine needs a bit of a clean. I've put heavy mileage on it in a short time. Need to feed the leather, dust the dash and hoover the carpets 

but mine looks the spit of this inside:










The Alezan leather isn't to many people's tastes, but I also have the Sunset (gold/orange) paint. Personally I love the leather and that combination (plus the one pictured). That leather with black looks even better, but I decided never to buy a black car....

I've also replaced the door entry sill trims with ones which have a long alu plate rather than just the "Z" in the middle.


----------



## YELLOW_TT (Feb 25, 2004)

the only thing i was disapointed with on the z was the quality of the materials used on the inside dash and switches and so on very hard cheep looking imo apart from that i was very impressed


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

jampott said:


> Not to hand. I can take some at the weekend, but TBH mine needs a bit of a clean. I've put heavy mileage on it in a short time. Need to feed the leather, dust the dash and hoover the carpets
> 
> but mine looks the spit of this inside:
> 
> ...


I think that looks a good combo Tim. Quite similar to the tractor's light brown hide and black trim, that a few scoffed at, but changed their view when they had seen it.


----------



## jgoodman00 (May 6, 2002)

Looks great. Contrasting colours certainly brighten up an interior.


----------



## PaulS (Jun 15, 2002)

8) That does look nice. I like the body colour too, it looks similar to Avus.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

The body colour of that one is "Gunmetal" - which is quite an Avus colour. "Blade" is a proper silver, Kuro is black, Azure is the gorgeous blue, Sunset is (my) Orange and Chilli is (rare, but lush) red.

I honestly find it hard to fault the interior, really...

For me, the TT suffered from:

1) VERY poor seats
2) awkward heater controls
3) lousy stereo controls
4) poor visibility of the instrument cluster (at my required seating position)
5) soft, easy to damage aluminium trim
6) air con knobs which crack if you look at them
7) an awkwardly mounted CD changer, impossible to change without a stationary car (and no passenger)
8) nowhere to put a reasonably sized mobile phone
9) awkardly placed gear lever with long throw

I find the majority of these things addressed in the Nissan:

1) excellent, supportive and well placed seats
2) very simple heater controls
3) stereo controls on steering wheel
4) instrument cluster which moves with the wheel tilt
5) hmmm we still get this a bit 
6) nah
7) in-dash 6 disc changer
8) a choice of places, including a built in handsfree kit with wheel mounted buttons
9) well placed, and well sorted shift

Nissan has also carried over the "square dimple" touches as seen on the Rays wheel spokes, the door handles etc on the interior. So it certainly feels "designed", although not quite so stylised as the TT.

It is hard to comment on the quality of materials. For me they are MORE than adequate. Much better than the Japanese versions of the car. I also put more importance on the cabin layout and ergonomics than maybe you do, and it is immediately noticeable that someone has had a good think about where to put things. It did make me wonder whether the TT was made to look nice inside first, and function second...

The Alezan leather is superb. Its akin to Baseball in a TT, only brighter. I'm sure it polarises opinion (as does my choice of exterior colour) - even amongst the Zed owners, just like Baseball or (say) Imola yellow does amongst the TT fans. But it lends a brightness to the interior that is missing otherwise, and gives it a completely different "look". And for only Â£345, if I remember correctly! (Audi would want your firstborn child!).

Having looked at some Boxster and BMW interiors, I can honestly say I prefer the Zed inside to most that I've seen. Some of the BMW and Porsche interiors look VERY dated and staid. Square, plastic and downright naff in some cases. I'm sure if you hunt down the options list you can make it look a lot better and begin to match the TT or the Zed for looks - but at what cost?

I got a brand new, fully loaded ~280bhp 3.5L V6 RWD car with special leather, forged alloys and a vibrant paint job for a snip over Â£28k. I wonder what it will be worth when I want to trade it in for the ragtop version which (I hope!) is imminent!


----------



## garvin (May 7, 2002)

jampott said:


> For me, the TT suffered from:
> 
> 1) VERY poor seats
> 2) awkward heater controls
> ...


Hmmmmm.

I can't agree with 1. Tis true that the Zed seating is good and was very supportive during my test drive - I just couldn't get the seat in the right position so only OK, I have concluded, for people with legs some 2" shorter than mine (mind you I do always have to wear trousers of the long leg variety). The TT seats are, IMHO, extremely good and on a par with the Zed. I can drive the TT for 5 hours at a stretch with absolutely no problems whatsoever.

As for 2, heater controls, tis true that the Zed controls are more simple but the TT is not that 'difficult'. My 'beef' with air con system on the Zed was that it didn't really work too well and was intrusive - I notice from the 350Z forum that there are a lot of complaints about the Zed misting up too easily as well.

Now, whereas I would not call the TT stereo controls 'lousy', the Zed is much better having steering wheel mounted controls - a big downside for the TT I would agree. The Zed also has the cruise controls on the steering wheel which is another definite plus over the TT as the TT stalk mounted cruise controls really are lousy!

Poor visibility of the instrument cluster. This probably is very subjective. I like the steering wheel to be close to me and low. In the TT this affords me a perfect view of the instruments. I have no complaint of the visibility of the instruments in the Zed at all.

Ah, number 5. What's this all about then? - I haven't noticed any easy to damage trim .......... or am I not trying hard enough :wink:

Cracking air control knobs grommit! - most definitely a TT flaw - mine is cracked but only noticeable if you really examine it - function isn't impaired at all, although this isn't a good reason for the poor design.

The CD changer in the TT isn't the best placed but it's fairly straightforward - I thought tthe point of a CD changer was that you didn't have to change CDs whilst on the move. A lot of cars have them in the boot for goodness sake.

Mobile phones ........... now who these days has a reasonably sized mobile phone ..... they're all titchy. The knee pad mount I have in the TT is pretty good (although I must say that the new factory fitted 'pad' on the TT dash is definitely not desireable).

The gear lever in the Zed is definitely better placed than the one in the TT and is of shorter throw. However, the TT shift can hardly be described as 'awkward'.

Finally, in my original post I stated that the 'noise' levels in the Zed were, to my mind, unacceptable at cruising speeds. It seems I'm not alone. Again from the 350Z forum, I see that owners are now making up their own soundproofing 'kits' to cut down on road roar etc. For a Â£28k car this surely is unacceptable!


----------

