activa Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 Well,well,well-looks like the "Z" club is here in force! Welcome along guys! Although I believe this is probably a one off visit to answer this thread! I read all your posts and thought maybe one of you would turn up something that I didn't know about that would have me back-tracking,sadly that isn't the case. In amongst the sensible views there is some complete rubbish written. Firstly,we are talking about the same cars here? A 300ZX Twin Turbo and a Porsche 944 Turbo SE.I ask this 'cos I don't see why someone should put "Audi rot box".It's not VW-Audi based(unlike the 924 turbo that you may be thinking of)and the only reason it would have any rot on it is if it had a bad repair at sometime in its life.Porsche build quality is superb,no question! So now that's cleared up we can get back to the main point of discussion regarding the performance of the two cars! Let's go back in time first.The 240Z was a great car,especially back in 1970-the 944 Turbo was a great car back in 1988,it's STILL a great car 16 years on.The 300ZX was only great if you lived in the States and wanted a big muscular touring car(hence why most are autos),in the U.K they weren't very popular at all.I suggest the only reason that they're popular now is that they're cheap performance! But not enough performance if you're gonna talk about the 944T in the same breath. 350Z(not my comparison) quarter mile-14.5 /top speed 150's 300TT quarter mile-Best 13.9 worst 14.5 /top speed 150's 944T quarter mile-Best 13.5 worst 13.6 /top speed 160,s So as you can see from these figures my claims were not guesswork! My friend had a 944T at the same time as his missus had a 300TT,he admitted the Nissan couldn't hold a candle to the Porsche in any respect and yet it had been him that bought it for her.The Porsche will outbrake,out handle and out perform the Nissan and just as importantly,outlast it! And as for the comparison "near supercar performance" when reading articles about the Nissan,that quote is true.The only difference is,when they tested the 944 they didn't include the "near" part,it wasn't needed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VG30DETT Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 300zx TT tested top speed is around 165mph (not sure where u got 150mph from, thats wrong - Perhaps UK Speed restricted version). Comparison reviews (by motoring journalists, not you and your mate!) between both cars shows near identical performance with the 300zx having a stronger top end. But more importantly, and where it really matters, the in gear acceleration times (50-70, 60-80, 80-100..etc) were all betwen 0.5 and 1 second quicker for the 300zx. Lap times around a circuit were also identical. However the Zed was also smoother and more comfortable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agoogy Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 Nicely edited post there mate... hiding the attrocious maths...we know the truth though eh.. ha ha.. Don't think I said anywhere, edited or not that the Nissan had none...they won LeMans didn't they?....once... Would like to see/read where time and time again the 300 has proved better than the 350Z remember its not all about speed, most 'enthusiasts' prefer handling clarity over American biased woolyness. Hey if the popular motoring press say thats the case then I'm happy for my 944t to be one too! but in EVO its in the coupe GT class...along with the NSX..so I stand corrected there..they call the NSX the useable Supercar.... NSX 168mph, 276bhp 220lbs/ft 1410kg, 5.5 to 60. 5 stars 300zx 156, 280bhp 275lbs/ft 1590kg, 6.0. 4 stars (Best ever Drivers Nissan, bar the Skyline it says...) 944t 163mph, 250bhp, 258lbs/ft, 1399kg, 5.4. 4 stars 350z 155mph, 276bhp, 268lbs/ft, 1525kg, 6.1. 4.5 stars (in the small coupe section) So Porsche/Honda = lightweight and fast..less is more Nissan = heavy and not quite as fast...although the smaller 350z is WELL close to the fat 300, nearly 200kg heavier! jeez, and thats progress! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
activa Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 [ QUOTE ] 300zx TT tested top speed is around 165mph (not sure where u got 150mph from, thats wrong - Perhaps UK Speed restricted version). [/ QUOTE ] If you read my post again you'll see that I put 150's and 160's as apposed to exact top speeds as these vary from one publication to another.And it was my mate who owned BOTH cars at the same time-just like a journo-so who better to be able to drive them both every day and tell them apart? And if your in-gear figures are so correct(which I can assure you they are not)then why doesn't the 300 run the quarter quicker? The quarter mile is the benchmark and has been for at least the last 10 years(long before the Pod was full of Max Power readers on a Sunday),so until the Nissan figures change(which they can't because tests are tests)then you can read in black and white which is the faster car. And as for the Z being smoother and more comfortable-of course it is!!! Most Grand Tourers would be!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VG30DETT Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 Your right I did edit the post, but it originally said 1966, and I corrected that some 20mins before you posted. American biased woolyness - I think your mistaken the Z32 with the Z31. Z32 is praised for its Firm roll-free handling, and it defies its weight. I quote from "Car magazine" - Accuracy and Precision are hallmarks of this cars handling. Steering is responsive, clean and bereft of twitchiness. Body control through s-bends is impeccable. Those EVO figures are all wrong, not suprising really, you hear different figures everywhere you go. 165mph, 300bhp, 5.2 secs (although most say 5.5 secs) The 300zx is also very tamely tuned as it comes out of the factory. Japanese regulations..etc Boost pressure is only set at 9psi, compared to the 944T with 12.5 psi (I think?) If its quicker at 9psi, just imagine what its like when set to same PSI as the 944T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agoogy Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 oh dear VG30DETT, your arguments seem to be being left behind a bit... perhaps they should loose some weight... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VG30DETT Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] 300zx TT tested top speed is around 165mph (not sure where u got 150mph from, thats wrong - Perhaps UK Speed restricted version). [/ QUOTE ] If you read my post again you'll see that I put 150's and 160's as apposed to exact top speeds as these vary from one publication to another.And it was my mate who owned BOTH cars at the same time-just like a journo-so who better to be able to drive them both every day and tell them apart? And if your in-gear figures are so correct(which I can assure you they are not)then why doesn't the 300 run the quarter quicker? The quarter mile is the benchmark and has been for at least the last 10 years(long before the Pod was full of Max Power readers on a Sunday),so until the Nissan figures change(which they can't because tests are tests)then you can read in black and white which is the faster car. And as for the Z being smoother and more comfortable-of course it is!!! Most Grand Tourers would be!!!! [/ QUOTE ] You still put the Porsche as 160 and the 300zx at 150, despite now back tracking (!) that they are only estimates. Those in-gear figures are publicised figures, I very much doubt they are wrong. The 300zx does have the power advantage and weight does'nt matter so much once rolling. oh, and 13.8 is the 300zx quater mile time I have written in front of me for a standard Zed. Cant find anywhere better than 14.1 for the 944T but I'll trust your figures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VG30DETT Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 [ QUOTE ] oh dear VG30DETT, your arguments seem to be being left behind a bit... perhaps they should loose some weight... [/ QUOTE ] funny, I was thinking the complete opposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agoogy Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 Your maths is still dreadful. So we're comparing extra cheapo import zx's with British spec 944t's then now are we...talk about moving the goal posts... next you'll be telling me about the state of tune the manufacturers use, oh no! wait there it is! well if you're gonna bring that into the equation, I'm off to the Skoda Fabia forum, cos my Porsche eats their cars alive! despite the fact you can't compare them... Hey you quote from top magazines and so do I...can't have it both ways. .....and just imagine what would happen if the Porsche had 2 turbos.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
activa Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 [ QUOTE ] Cant find anywhere better than 14.1 for the 944T but I'll trust your figures. [/ QUOTE ] Can I ask where this supposed 14.1 is printed? I wouldn't mind having a look at that test! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VG30DETT Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 No you cant compare a Porsche with a Skoda. You can compare a 944T with a 300zx though, and apon its launch ALL reviews said the 300zx had knocked the 944T of the Top Spot. I dont argue that the 944 is a fine car, I do argue that the 300zx is an inferior car just becuase of its Badge though. argue all you like, its the way it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agoogy Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 "Weight doesn't matter once rolling"!! jeez... well I'll get myself a nice Volvo estate then, because with a twin turbo upgrade it will obviously out corner, out brake and and out drag a similarly powered Caterham for example. You should study motor racing a bit more... one of it main parameters is weight LOSS and for very good reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VG30DETT Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 We were talking about in gear acceleration times, and I said "and weight does'nt matter so much once rolling" Jeesh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agoogy Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 Hey if you want to argure that the 300zx is inferior don't let me stop you. Just imagine what would happen if the 300zx wasn't so lardy....we wouldn't even be having this discussion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agoogy Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 apologies.. at least now you admit weight is important part of what makes performance cars great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
activa Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 Yep,agreed! Weight is everything in performance motoring. That's why all cars are stripped to be raced,have plastic windows fitted,all trim removed etc. And what's this about the badge? Who cares what badge it's wearing,I'm talking about pure performance here.I have nothing against Nissan,Toyota or Honda(especially Honda/Mugen who are the best engineers in Japland by a mile IMO)all I'm doing is stating facts and in return I read about "Audi rot boxes" from ill-informed people who probably quote all these figures down the pub and have never even had the arse to run there car down the strip incase of humiliation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zchybrid Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 Blimey, world war III My original staement of: stock 944turbo (250bhp) would stonk a stock 300zx still stands in my opinion. I have had a couple of friends who have owned 300zx's and another friend who had a 944turbo (250bhp model) im into all kinds of motorsport and go to lots of events including trackdays, dragracing, lemans, F1 etc.. I have never owned a porsche or a nissan and i am not biased either way. From what i have seen, a lot of 300zx are automatic (my friends were too) and i havn't seen any 944 turbo auto's At santapod my friends auto 300zx couldn't get into 14 second 1/4's I also havn't seen a <u>stock</u> manual 300zx get into 13's.... and i've seen a few over the years!! My friends 944 turbo on his first go at santa pod ran a 13.7 @ 101mph and went on to do a 13.6 best that day. Both 300zx's my friends had were uk cars, i admit they were auto's but this shouldn't effect handling, which in my opinion was a little slushy compared to the more 'competent' and nimble 944turbo chassis. must add this is a later 944turbo which has a revised chassis set up (but this is the model we originally said about) I think the 300zx looks wise is a bit "wannabe supercar" and did giggle a little at the medallion man comment earlier in the post. but everyone's taste is different. The 944 dosn't say "supercar" to me, thats what the 911 was addressed to be. the 944 turbo was a wolf in sheeps cloths, lots of people think it is porker 944 with a turbo bolted on.... far from it, lots of re-designing was injected into the later turbo model. I have driven so many cars as i used to work for a prestige car valeting firm and used to pick cars up from as far as 25 miles away to take away for valeting. Without going into too much details i have driven hundreds of sports and supercars from ferrari 360's, 550, 355, testarossa, 996 turbo's C4's, down to normal sporty cars like audi tt's / boxters etc.... and through all this modern stuff i still recall the 944 turbo being a great drive and still comparable to most modern sports cars i drive, this dosn't include supercars because in my opinion they arn't as super to drive A to B as people like to think!! But the 300zx dosn't bring back any enjoyable driving memories.... this isn't to say they are bad because the obviously arn't,, just not as good as the 944 in my opion!! (and dont flame my butt for this, its just my opinion from experience) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VG30DETT Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 All fair comments. I drive a Manual 300zx myself, as personally I dont think the Auto suits it. Driving experience is down to your own opinion. You preferred the 944, and there are magazine articles that say the opposite. But as already proven above, a 944 will not stonk a 300zx. Performance is near identical, with it would appear, the 944 capable of .1 second 1/4 miles quicker and the Zed having better in in gear acceleration times. 0-60 and top speed being pretty much identical too. And as already stated, the 944 maybe lighter, but the Zed has the more modern advanced suspension and chassis setup that seems to makes up for its weight disadvantage and gives both cars near identical lap times (also proven in comparison reviews). I did'nt register to slate the 944, just to disprove some incorrect and abusive statements made towards the 300zx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agoogy Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 No, what makes up for the weight disadvantage is that you have 2 turbos, 30 extra hp and 17 extra lbs/ft. The alledged more modern suspension and chassis set up is again fantasy. The 924 chassis, which gave rise to the 944 chassis gave rise to one of the finest front engined RWD chassis of all time: the 968. This discussion is proving really naff, it really isn't a case of 'my car is better than yours' is it? The cars were priced and engineered for different markets, in different decades! Its like a 350z - 300zx comparison... not 'real' It seems perfectly obvious that given the inclanation any weight of car can be made to accelerate, corner and go as fast as the owner wants given enough cash... So you could equally compare a 944t with say an M5 (E34)Audi S6, Scooby Impreza or a Cayenne turbo, they all perform the same on paper, they may all perform well on the track, but they are aimed at differing markets and made in different times. But each has differing amounts of engineering prestige and skill, some perfect ride, some perfect cornering, or build quality or just plain outright grunt. So put the 300zx in the time frame comparison it deserves up against a 968... see the prices they command, the respect they get, the accolades from your blessed motoring press and the lack of them on british roads... and realise that this car was a product of the research and development of the 924/944 and from one of the greatest SPORTS CAR manufacturers the world has ever seen. The same cannot be said of the Nissan, it has received no such accolades, it was never compared with Ferrari's, Maserati's, it didn't appear anywhere in the PCOTY awards for its year and again there are reasons for this. It is underrated, but that has more to do with the fact they're ten a penny thanks to the import market, they're reliable and therefore provide a soft and warm and safe 'supercar' experience backed up by Nissan dealers in every town industrial park, and given that their cheap also allows the Fast and the Furious to wreck what is wonderful piece of Product design and then tinker with its engine just so that they can out drag their mates and stick two fingers up to anyone else at the lights... yawn. Their magazines tell them its a great car, it looks like a great car, on paper and on track it seems a great car. But they always have that nagging doubt...Its a Nissan, only time can change that feeling, and an increase in marketing the car under a different name. Toyota will never crack the luxury market...Lexus leads it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VG30DETT Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 [ QUOTE ] No, what makes up for the weight disadvantage is that you have 2 turbos, 30 extra hp and 17 extra lbs/ft. [/ QUOTE ] Strange that..considering you and your comrades just spent the day trying to tell me that the 944 was quicker than the zed, now your trying to say that the extra performance means it can give the same lap times as the "better handling" 944. [ QUOTE ] The cars were priced and engineered for different markets, in different decades! Its like a 350z - 300zx comparison... not 'real' [/ QUOTE ] They were priced and engineered for the same markets. The Porsche was about £6k more expensive becuase of its badge, and its a well known fact that the Zed was designed to beat the 944T in europe and the Corvette in America. Yes, they are differnet decades..but then I did'nt start the 944 will stomp all over a 300zx trash talk, only repying to the rubbish previously posted. [ QUOTE ] So put the 300zx in the time frame comparison it deserves up against a 968... see the prices they command, the respect they get, the accolades from your blessed motoring press and the lack of them on british roads... and realise that this car was a product of the research and development of the 924/944 and from one of the greatest SPORTS CAR manufacturers the world has ever seen. The same cannot be said of the Nissan, it has received no such accolades, it was never compared with Ferrari's, Maserati's, it didn't appear anywhere in the PCOTY awards for its year and again there are reasons for this. [/ QUOTE ] in 1990 Motortrend named the 300zx "Performance car of the year". 1990 Road and Track names it one of the "top 10 best cars in the world". Car and Driver names the 300-ZX Turbo “One of the Ten Best Cars in the world”......for 6 years in a row. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DivineE Posted January 19, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 Wow! My thread has grown somewhat since I looked yeaterday! But I finally finished reading it and I'd like to add a few bits. Personally I think (bar a few hot moments) VG30DETT is being a fair chap. He is listening to your comments and backing up his arguements. Also I really dont agree with all this comparing badges I think its beside the point and irellivent. I'v been to car shows where I park my 944 next to his 300zx and everyone crowds round the 300 taking photo's with stary eyes. Likewise at other events I am bombarded with questions from excited people and he is ignored?! It just depends on the different crowds as to which commands the highest respect. Also before I say this I would like to say I really like the 300zx as a car and it is fast! Really really fast but That aside though I have to ask have any of these 300zx drivers driven a 944turbo? I believe since my friend and I have swapped and 'extensively tested' each others cars their can be no question that the 944 is more comunicative (like a go-cart) and would be alot faster round a track! The 300zx as standard suffers from bodyroll and as for brakes I think VG30DETT you were really pushing it saying it would outbrake a 944!!! Every 300 driver knows the standard brakes even on the top model are really poor! They are alot lower spec than the 944 and the 944 is lighter!! There really is no logic there. Its not in the same league. As for speed I know they are similar but as I said we never raced them so can't comment. Well thats my bit added for now Ben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VG30DETT Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 Thanks. Although it was'nt me who said the 300zx would out-brake a 944T. I've never driven a 994T myself, my comments about around the track performance were from mainstream magazine articles where they were compared. Stock brakes were a weakness against the opposition, really poor would be an exageration though. Im not sure their a lower spec though (Im no brake expert), easily fixed ofcourse, but guess thats not the point. Its been an interesting debate, cheers guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
activa Posted January 19, 2005 Report Share Posted January 19, 2005 [ QUOTE ] Its been an interesting debate, cheers guys [/ QUOTE ] Agreed! I'm glad to see out of the half dozen Z owners that posted one person had the knowledge to stand his ground while the others could only take the p**s out of cars they don't know about.So if you're ever in the mood to take your car to the Pod please make sure you post here and let us know so we can join you! ATB Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Z32kicksAss Posted January 20, 2005 Report Share Posted January 20, 2005 ok then , just to let u know. santa pod , feb 19th rwyb day. be a very interesting day if any of u guys are up 4 it !! we can all put the facts on the track Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zchybrid Posted January 20, 2005 Report Share Posted January 20, 2005 I'll be there, and as im neither Porsche or Nissan owner, and un-biased either way, i'll be the ideal snipper to watch the times if either party turns up!! P.S. 19 febuary is a saturday night special, so dont turn up early morning or you'll have to spend all day wandering around a northampton field.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now