Sports Cars Team

[turbovr41991]

Sorry, I missed the part where the Z owner was claiming his was a real sports car over the other ones in the team…
Skylines by them selves are not fast. They were the equivalent of the infinity G35 (which in current form is a 350z with a back seat.) The GTS and GTR skylines are the fast ones. As for the Altima and the G35, the G35 is predominantly a rear wheel drive car. The Altima is front (also the Maxima is front.) The Infinity equivalent to the front wheel drive Nissans was a model called the I35 which I don’t think they still produce.
In my opinion 2003 the 350Z was a well priced sports car. Mine was 27k new. Compare that to the 2003 Mustang or Camaro (Did they still make them then???) The Z was pretty solid. Under powered compared to the corvettes and higher end sports cars, but 300hp out of a NA V6 is not bad numbers. When you are comparing stats are you comparing the V6’s models against each other or are you comparing the V8 domestics to a luxury version of the V6 350z?

[MGB=MPG]

a lot of power to weight does not make a sports car .
in 1962 [ first year] these types had 25.6 Lb/HP, in 76 it was 42.3 , last year of production in 1980 it was 37.4 ....62 HP out of a 110cid/1800 CC engine would be pretty shabby these days[Honda CRX 1.6i-VT, 150 bhp variant]
on some of my other sites the consensus of the very experienced drivers is that those who train in lower powered machines develop superior technique, learning to manage the task ..of getting around
trailing throttle Glossaryinto the curve , Glossarytrail braking to the selected apex and power out

there may be those who thing those techniques do not apply to FE , i contend that if one can corner with minimum application of brake its all for the good, conservation of momentum is the name of that game

thats what i like about Le mans .. all those different classes on the road at the same time


where are those civics , they look like *sports* cars too

[UltArc]

Originally Posted by turbovr41991

Sorry, I missed the part where the Z owner was claiming his was a real sports car over the other ones in the team…
Skylines by them selves are not fast. They were the equivalent of the infinity G35 (which in current form is a 350z with a back seat.) The GTS and GTR skylines are the fast ones. As for the Altima and the G35, the G35 is predominantly a rear wheel drive car. The Altima is front (also the Maxima is front.) The Infinity equivalent to the front wheel drive Nissans was a model called the I35 which I don’t think they still produce.
In my opinion 2003 the 350Z was a well priced sports car. Mine was 27k new. Compare that to the 2003 Mustang or Camaro (Did they still make them then???) The Z was pretty solid. Under powered compared to the corvettes and higher end sports cars, but 300hp out of a NA V6 is not bad numbers. When you are comparing stats are you comparing the V6’s models against each other or are you comparing the V8 domestics to a luxury version of the V6 350z?

I am not comparing 2003s, I am comparing 2012 and 2013s. And I am tying my best to stay in the same ball park, so of if I am looking at 6 cylinders I try to stay with only 6s. Sometimes you can't, but I try to. I don't think there was a Camaro in 03, and I don't know much about the Mustangs from back then.

Originally Posted by MGB=MPG

a lot of power to weight does not make a sports car .
in 1962 [ first year] these types had 25.6 Lb/HP, in 76 it was 42.3 , last year of production in 1980 it was 37.4 ....62 HP out of a 110cid/1800 CC engine would be pretty shabby these days[Honda CRX 1.6i-VT, 150 bhp variant]
on some of my other sites the consensus of the very experienced drivers is that those who train in lower powered machines develop superior technique, learning to manage the task ..of getting around
trailing throttle Glossaryinto the curve , Glossarytrail braking to the selected apex and power out

there may be those who thing those techniques do not apply to FE , i contend that if one can corner with minimum application of brake its all for the good, conservation of momentum is the name of that game

thats what i like about Le mans .. all those different classes on the road at the same time


where are those civics , they look like *sports* cars too

I definitely think power to weight ratio is important for sports cars. I'm not really sure about your point, I mean just because it gets worse doesn't mean much...

I mean if gas prices soar, then suv sales drop and Fit sales rise. Our most popular day on the thread had record high gas prices...if we are in a shortage of fuel, then we won't be working on building power. If we have increases in safety requirements, and new technologies to add, weight will go up.

Amd I agree with the point to enhance skill, on a track. In real life, I have way more fun in my Mustang than anything else I've driven lol

[turbovr41991]

Originally Posted by UltArc

I am not comparing 2003s, I am comparing 2012 and 2013s. And I am tying my best to stay in the same ball park, so of if I am looking at 6 cylinders I try to stay with only 6s. Sometimes you can't, but I try to. I don't think there was a Camaro in 03, and I don't know much about the Mustangs from back then.

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?

[MGB=MPG]

its the 300 HP thing im OCD on the 300HP

EX181 works competition cars



23 Aug'57 - MG EX181- 1489cc producing c290 bhp @ 7000 rpm Supercharged MGA Twin cam engine. running on 86% methanol laced with nitrobenzene, acetone and sulphuric ether. - British Driver: Stirling Moss 245.64mph - 395.31 km/h - Experimental project 1100-1500cc

3 Oct'59 - MG EX181 - 1506cc producing over 300 bhp @ 7300 rpm Supercharged MGA Twin cam engine, running on 86% methanol laced with nitrobenzene, acetone and sulphuric ether. - American Driver: Phil Hill - 254.91 mph - 410.23 km/h - Experimental project 1500-2000cc - to this day still the fastest MG ever.

but they just went in a straight line

here is the most recent air body



then there is Formula one
Formula One engines - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
typically produce 224 kilowatts (300 bhp, 304 PS) per litre of displacement,
basic configuration of a naturally aspirated Formula One engine has not been greatly modified since the 1967

[UltArc]

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.

[D.O.G.]

We seem to have lost some team mates.

On a brighter note ...
One of my nieces is getting married in November, near Wagga Wagga (don't we have interesting place names in Australia?).

This is great news, because it gives me a definite target to shoot for in finishing the Datsun gearbox conversion.
Depending which route I take getting there, this should be about a 1000km round trip.
With the original gear ratios, that means refueling somewhere. With the new ratios, there's the possibility I could do that in one tank!

I'm swapping the 3 speed auto for a 4 speed auto (without lock-up ) from an '85 Skyline. This was the last model (except 4 wheel drives) to use the L series straight six.

Depending which diff I use (I have a 3.9 and a 3.54), that changes my top gear drive ratio from 3.54:1 to 2.652:1 or 2.40:1. The 5 speed manual runs at 2.76:1.

While 2.40:1 would be fine at 110kph (2300rpm), It might be too tall for "normal" driving at 80kph (1680rpm)? Any opinions would be appreciated, I've attached a dyno chart that claims to be "stock".

[Sporty Modder]

That looks like a stock dyno chart to me,

[MGB=MPG]

that torque curve is very flat, gets a plateau and hold it pretty even..
i think you could be OK to economy cruise at 1600-1700 RPM , but with a strong head wind or a Hill it would be downshift time.

at those RPMs you would not want to accelerate with too much throttle i dont think , myself i dont like the way they sound with big throttle way down in the power curve

i read of the racers swapping the diff gears from track to track , not too big a job is it ?
here is my power curves , as you can see it fall off very sharply below 2000

with my gears at 80 KPH i would be turning about 2800 .my absolute economy cruise would be lower than that .
on cruise i refer to a vacuum gauge and try to keep my manifold vacuums at such a level that the dizzy is in full vacuum advance , thats over 10 INHG manifold



as compared to yours

[eco_generator]

Originally Posted by D.O.G.

We seem to have lost some team mates.

Eh, I can't speak for the other people that left, but to sum it up in 3 words: too much drama.

I probably will need to unsubscribe this thread to stop having arguments about Mustangs and 350Z's showing up in my UserCP.