Quote:
Originally Posted by turbovr41991
The person here had an old 350Z he bought for under 10k. Seems like a pretty solid deal. Now comparing it to your new mustang or anything else that is double the price seems silly.
Even if you just want to compare the engines, Nissans 350Z's VQ35 engine platform is over 13 years old. In 2003 it was a very effiecent engine. In fact it was the only V6 engine from Nissan, Ford, or GM to be listed on the top 10 engines: Ward's 10 Best Engines - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In 2007 Ford's Duratec 35 finally made the list. My point is, that each company's inovations come at different times. Comparing a newer V6 to an older V6 is not really an apples to apples comparison. Think of comparising the 1990 V6 300Z TT to even a V8 mustang. both were pretty solid cars. Then look at the neglected Camero of 1990. It did not get a quality engine in it until the LS1 in 98? Amazing engine, but took forever to get to the market. I wonder what Nissan has up their sleeves for their next engine platform? |
Air, I think you may be mistaken. When I compare my car to a Z, I refer to a 2012 370, not his 350. That definitely isn't fair lol, and it seems a bit...ignorant to make the comparison. I'm not sure how the confusion came about, but those were NOT my intentions.
My only points were these.
-I was offended for the sports car team.
-I heard the 350 of that time had a poor suspension for how well the rest of the car was built and done.
-Pound for pound, penny for penny, 2012/13s, the Mustang and Chevy are the best FR sports car deals out there.
For 2012/2013
Your post there makes complete sense if I meant to be rediculous, but I did not intend that meaning, or belittle his car at all. I was just making a note of what has been mentioned to me about that general model. For 2003, FR, Z is the way to go. Miatas were still soft tops I believe, otherwise that would be number one. RX are too inefficent, Mustangs seemed like...junk, base model wise, or even v6. GTO if they made it would be nice, I heard good engine and tranny in them. Not sure if they made it that year. S2000 would be great, if one could find it, and probably not in the price range.
EDOT: As I read the whole thread, my posts make total sense to me. But when I only compare it to one or two posts before, it appears to be unfair, or not comparable. I do mean a truly civilized debate, and although I base my statements off of my brain since my tablet is poor at multitasking, I do my best to be precise, or shoot lower than real life, so not to exagerate- as in, how many torques do I have? I think its like 100 at 100 rpms...so I say 'should be over 90 after 120 rpms'. I try to under play what I do not know, regarding the winner.
I also try to give the benefit of doubt to the loser. Such as hyundai genesis, IF it ran on basic fuel instead of premium, the reliability, power, and fuel economy only beats the challenger, and is subpar to Z, Stang, C Aro, and others.