My new Z pics...
15-Feb-2003, 10:46 AM
#41
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: London & T.O.
Posts: 240
Originally posted by audiophilia
I think you get a little more for your money than just the 40 horses, IMO. While the 350 is a fine car (congrats, BTW), I don't think it is in the same league as a car as an M3 (although completely different). As my wife works for Nissan head office, I got to drive the 350 at length. Very good (and stiff handling), good power, zero visability and trunk:-), lots of looks from other drivers. But I much prefer the drive, braking, handling, and cachet of the BMW.
Above *very* biased opinion by older BMW driver.
Enjoy your new car.
I think you get a little more for your money than just the 40 horses, IMO. While the 350 is a fine car (congrats, BTW), I don't think it is in the same league as a car as an M3 (although completely different). As my wife works for Nissan head office, I got to drive the 350 at length. Very good (and stiff handling), good power, zero visability and trunk:-), lots of looks from other drivers. But I much prefer the drive, braking, handling, and cachet of the BMW.
Above *very* biased opinion by older BMW driver.
Enjoy your new car.
I do aggree M3 is in a different class. It's more reasonable to compare the M3 to a Vette, the Skyline GTR etc..
17-Feb-2003, 04:28 PM
#45
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 88
Originally posted by audiophilia
I think you get a little more for your money than just the 40 horses, IMO. While the 350 is a fine car (congrats, BTW), I don't think it is in the same league as a car as an M3 (although completely different). As my wife works for Nissan head office, I got to drive the 350 at length. Very good (and stiff handling), good power, zero visability and trunk:-), lots of looks from other drivers. But I much prefer the drive, braking, handling, and cachet of the BMW.
Above *very* biased opinion by older BMW driver.
Enjoy your new car.
I think you get a little more for your money than just the 40 horses, IMO. While the 350 is a fine car (congrats, BTW), I don't think it is in the same league as a car as an M3 (although completely different). As my wife works for Nissan head office, I got to drive the 350 at length. Very good (and stiff handling), good power, zero visability and trunk:-), lots of looks from other drivers. But I much prefer the drive, braking, handling, and cachet of the BMW.
Above *very* biased opinion by older BMW driver.
Enjoy your new car.
The entry fee for the M3 buys you:
1) almost 50 more horses than the Z.
2) 8000 rpm redline on a 6 cyl.
3) 1/4 mile time almost 1 sec faster
4) killer track prowess, sig. beyond that of the Z
5) capable of seating 5
6) more luxury
7) auto-levellig HIDs (very cool!)
8) status, more exclusivity (than Z that is)
9) vehicle dynamics second to very few
10) etc., etc..
M5 is even better!
My point here is that M3 is more than just x$ more...
But that is not to say that I don't love the Z! I think it is an awesome car! and definitely good bang for the buck! a tad heavy for my liking but I wouldn't argue!
Congrats on the new car and sweet colour! I love the Z in blue!
17-Feb-2003, 05:03 PM
#46
-- site donator --
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 6,647
I love those cars. Congrats! Perfect color too. M3??? My 60 year old doctor has one of those. I don't even think they are in the same league. Apples to oranges, so there's no sense comparing them. Not saying I wouldn't take an M3, but I've driven a Z06, and for that kind of money, nothing compares to 405hp. Cars like the M3, 350, and the Vette are stand alone cars in classes of only one. The same in terms of what they provide (performance), but built for people with different tastes. Good buy Redfox, I'm jealous. One of my first cars was a '77 280Z.
17-Feb-2003, 09:44 PM
#47
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: London & T.O.
Posts: 240
Originally posted by cmb
I'd have to agree here.
The entry fee for the M3 buys you:
1) almost 50 more horses than the Z.
2) 8000 rpm redline on a 6 cyl.
3) 1/4 mile time almost 1 sec faster
4) killer track prowess, sig. beyond that of the Z
5) capable of seating 5
6) more luxury
7) auto-levellig HIDs (very cool!)
8) status, more exclusivity (than Z that is)
9) vehicle dynamics second to very few
10) etc., etc..
M5 is even better!
My point here is that M3 is more than just x$ more...
But that is not to say that I don't love the Z! I think it is an awesome car! and definitely good bang for the buck! a tad heavy for my liking but I wouldn't argue!
Congrats on the new car and sweet colour! I love the Z in blue!
I'd have to agree here.
The entry fee for the M3 buys you:
1) almost 50 more horses than the Z.
2) 8000 rpm redline on a 6 cyl.
3) 1/4 mile time almost 1 sec faster
4) killer track prowess, sig. beyond that of the Z
5) capable of seating 5
6) more luxury
7) auto-levellig HIDs (very cool!)
8) status, more exclusivity (than Z that is)
9) vehicle dynamics second to very few
10) etc., etc..
M5 is even better!
My point here is that M3 is more than just x$ more...
But that is not to say that I don't love the Z! I think it is an awesome car! and definitely good bang for the buck! a tad heavy for my liking but I wouldn't argue!
Congrats on the new car and sweet colour! I love the Z in blue!
2) ?? What's our point? Corvettes have sub 7000 rpm redline making 400 hp.
3) 13.5 vs 14.0 both by MT, and you should compare the tires on the M3 to that of the Z.
4) Drag Coef. 0.32 for M vs 0.29 for Z, Z has 0 lift, Z has Brembo FP40 12.8 front/12.7 rear, M has 12.4 front /12.3 rear NOT Brembo, NOT four/two piston + 250 pounds, same skid pad figures, Z has lower ground clearance, track prowess? Nuff said.
5) True, but then again, every sports car made have a seating capacity of 2, otherwise it's called a Sports Coupe right?
6) True.
7) True. But I would call that a Gizmo like the rain sensing wipers. Does that justify the price tag? That's debatable. I'd rather trade that for more power. Better yet, take that feature back and give me the money back so I can by aftermarket parts!
8) If I want status, I'll go buy a Ferrari. You are going after the wrong game here. If status is what you want, you are definitely driving the wrong car. Isn't that.... superficial?
9) See 4), I think Z has the M beat. BTW, both have Traction control, Limited Slip and VDC (called something else for the BMW).
19) etc... etc.. ????
1) + 3) + 6) + BMW name = $30k + tax?? Your call.
18-Feb-2003, 12:04 AM
#48
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: AT YOUR GIRLFRIENDS PLACE
Posts: 39
13.5 and 14.0 hahaha. thats so funny. all that cash and your puttin along slow as ****. **** im doin high 12's in my shitty civic all moter stock h moter. oh well we cant all drive civics.
![[1sL0CiviC]'s Avatar](https://www.civicforumz.com/customavatars/avatar12481_1.gif){kind=avatar}
18-Feb-2003, 09:30 AM
#50
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 88
Originally posted by redfox
1) True
2) ?? What's our point? Corvettes have sub 7000 rpm redline making 400 hp.
3) 13.5 vs 14.0 both by MT, and you should compare the tires on the M3 to that of the Z.
4) Drag Coef. 0.32 for M vs 0.29 for Z, Z has 0 lift, Z has Brembo FP40 12.8 front/12.7 rear, M has 12.4 front /12.3 rear NOT Brembo, NOT four/two piston + 250 pounds, same skid pad figures, Z has lower ground clearance, track prowess? Nuff said.
5) True, but then again, every sports car made have a seating capacity of 2, otherwise it's called a Sports Coupe right?
6) True.
7) True. But I would call that a Gizmo like the rain sensing wipers. Does that justify the price tag? That's debatable. I'd rather trade that for more power. Better yet, take that feature back and give me the money back so I can by aftermarket parts!
8) If I want status, I'll go buy a Ferrari. You are going after the wrong game here. If status is what you want, you are definitely driving the wrong car. Isn't that.... superficial?
9) See 4), I think Z has the M beat. BTW, both have Traction control, Limited Slip and VDC (called something else for the BMW).
19) etc... etc.. ????
1) + 3) + 6) + BMW name = $30k + tax?? Your call.
1) True
2) ?? What's our point? Corvettes have sub 7000 rpm redline making 400 hp.
3) 13.5 vs 14.0 both by MT, and you should compare the tires on the M3 to that of the Z.
4) Drag Coef. 0.32 for M vs 0.29 for Z, Z has 0 lift, Z has Brembo FP40 12.8 front/12.7 rear, M has 12.4 front /12.3 rear NOT Brembo, NOT four/two piston + 250 pounds, same skid pad figures, Z has lower ground clearance, track prowess? Nuff said.
5) True, but then again, every sports car made have a seating capacity of 2, otherwise it's called a Sports Coupe right?
6) True.
7) True. But I would call that a Gizmo like the rain sensing wipers. Does that justify the price tag? That's debatable. I'd rather trade that for more power. Better yet, take that feature back and give me the money back so I can by aftermarket parts!
8) If I want status, I'll go buy a Ferrari. You are going after the wrong game here. If status is what you want, you are definitely driving the wrong car. Isn't that.... superficial?
9) See 4), I think Z has the M beat. BTW, both have Traction control, Limited Slip and VDC (called something else for the BMW).
19) etc... etc.. ????
1) + 3) + 6) + BMW name = $30k + tax?? Your call.
it is no M3.
3) Forget what the magazine times print.
I've been following the Z guys and they're pulling of low 14's to high 13's.
Go to the BMW forums where you find E46 M3's running low and flat 13's, some reports of high 12's.
The M3 brings massive torque on tap, don't just look at the peak#s, and combines this with the ability to produce vast hp up at a high redline (8k) for a 6, this is quite an accomplishment. Anyone who's pushed an M3 will know the beauty of how it combines and brings together both the low and the high perfectly. (Unlike Honda, with high and no low, or Mustang, with low but no high)
4) M3's brakes come from a long line of track designed brakes. I don't think the Z will hold up to the M3's braking and track prowess, even with Brembo's help.
5) I totally agree with you here, sports cars equals 2 seats! why carry more? But the fact that the M3 can do all things sports and still carry 5 ppl is just having it all. I myself prefer 2 seaters.
7) BMW is pretty much pushing the 3.2L I6 to its limits, so trading for power would not be likely, plus having all the luxuries makes it all the more enjoyable. Next car will probably go bigger displacement. The new luxuries in the high end cars are the future standard features of the mid end cars and so on.
8) a Ferrari Modena costs $260G+ used. It has to be serviced very 10,000k, by only a few places in the GTA. That is in a league of exotics. THat is not even close to M3. It is far, far better. Status, definitely. The Ferrari is to the M3 as the M3 is to the Z and related class of cars. Actually the Ferrari is much farther even.
People buy M3's because they have the optional ability to carry multiple passengers, yet have a car that can outrun most and run with the real big boys. Status? What I mean by that is driving your business partners or clients around in the M3. Different world.
I didn't say I wanted status, but personally though, I don't think I definitely drive the wrong car. The SiR is my wife's car, and the CRX is my track car and I love them both. we'll leave it at that.
What I meant is that one gain of having an M3 is it's real and implied status. yes it is superficial, but so is Joe Millionaire, Survivor, the Bachelor and most everything else in popular culture today, you can't escape it, but you can ignore it though.
Just watch your 350Z and related commercials and ads...
"Prepare to be noticed"
"Cause for envy"
etc., etc. isn't that superficial? Nissan markets the Z / G35s for status and such all the time.
9) I don't think the Z has the M beat. I think the M has most cars on the road beat (including the Z) clearly. but that is my opinion.
I'm sorry for honing in on this. the M3 was brought up and then you guys addressed it and I added in. Let's agree to disagree.
Seriously though, like I said, the Z is AJAC's car of the year. Need I say more? Awesome purchase.
18-Feb-2003, 01:42 PM
#51
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: London & T.O.
Posts: 240
Agreed that the M3 is not a direct comparison to the Z. Different class cars. Z is not a lux car, but M3 is called a near lux car. Plus a $30+ tax price diff is enough to put the cars in different classes.
One disagreement, RT compared the Z to Vette, M3 and the 911. Z did have a shorter braking distance than the M3.
I also realize what the magazine says about car's performance is not true, therefore I compared MT numbers to MT numbers... just to be consistent.
OH and the status thing? I admit I was stretching the limits when I used a ferarri as an example. However, after doing extensive research for my next car, looking into the soon to be available, RX-8, Mitsu EVO VIII, WRX STI, used Supra TT, the CL Type-S, S2000, used S4, I decided on the Z, not for status. Frankly, I'll probably get more "girls" driving a S2000 due to the topless factor, but the whole package the Z had to offer, the unique styling, and the "nice enough" interior (compared to the WRX and the EVO) won me over. So I definitely got the car on the performance merrits alone.
BTW: I agree to disagree.
One disagreement, RT compared the Z to Vette, M3 and the 911. Z did have a shorter braking distance than the M3.
I also realize what the magazine says about car's performance is not true, therefore I compared MT numbers to MT numbers... just to be consistent.
OH and the status thing? I admit I was stretching the limits when I used a ferarri as an example. However, after doing extensive research for my next car, looking into the soon to be available, RX-8, Mitsu EVO VIII, WRX STI, used Supra TT, the CL Type-S, S2000, used S4, I decided on the Z, not for status. Frankly, I'll probably get more "girls" driving a S2000 due to the topless factor, but the whole package the Z had to offer, the unique styling, and the "nice enough" interior (compared to the WRX and the EVO) won me over. So I definitely got the car on the performance merrits alone.
BTW: I agree to disagree.
18-Feb-2003, 01:58 PM
#53
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: London & T.O.
Posts: 240
Originally posted by RCBH
13.5 and 14.0 hahaha. thats so funny. all that cash and your puttin along slow as ****. **** im doin high 12's in my shitty civic all moter stock h moter. oh well we cant all drive civics.
13.5 and 14.0 hahaha. thats so funny. all that cash and your puttin along slow as ****. **** im doin high 12's in my shitty civic all moter stock h moter. oh well we cant all drive civics.
My old Civic AUTOMATIC was faster than the Z. But then again, if you read all the posts on this thread, you would have learned that it's not all about speed is it? HAve fun driving your "shitty 12 second all moter stock h moter", get some more schooling done and grow older please.
19-Feb-2003, 11:35 AM
#55
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: LONDON (UWO)/Sauga
Posts: 49
Too many haters out there!!!!!!!
No way is an M3 comparable to a 350z...performance wise maybe...i dont know the exact numbers....but you cant compare the two...the 350z is supposed to be an "affordable" performance car. The m3 is in a totally different class.
I love both the m3 and 350z and hope to own a 350z within the next year. m3 pricing is just not realistic for me. If it was, id take the m3 of course!!!
I love your car...hope to see it around london sometime!...i want the track version also....
No way is an M3 comparable to a 350z...performance wise maybe...i dont know the exact numbers....but you cant compare the two...the 350z is supposed to be an "affordable" performance car. The m3 is in a totally different class.
I love both the m3 and 350z and hope to own a 350z within the next year. m3 pricing is just not realistic for me. If it was, id take the m3 of course!!!
I love your car...hope to see it around london sometime!...i want the track version also....
19-Feb-2003, 12:54 PM
#56
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: London & T.O.
Posts: 240
Yeah, I don't mean to suggest 350z is the **** out there. Whatever you or I may have, there is always something out there that's faster, prettier, etc.. I didn't like the fact that all I did was post some picks of my new ride for people to look at, but then there are the 1 or 2 people that feels the need to squash the 350z because of jealously??? I don't know.
AGain, if I had the money, I would be getting a M3 as well. And if I had more money, I would be getting a GTR, etc.. etc..
350z was the best bang for the buck for under $50k.
AGain, if I had the money, I would be getting a M3 as well. And if I had more money, I would be getting a GTR, etc.. etc..
350z was the best bang for the buck for under $50k.
19-Feb-2003, 03:08 PM
#57
Originally posted by redfox
Yeah, I don't mean to suggest 350z is the **** out there. Whatever you or I may have, there is always something out there that's faster, prettier, etc.. I didn't like the fact that all I did was post some picks of my new ride for people to look at, but then there are the 1 or 2 people that feels the need to squash the 350z because of jealously??? I don't know.
AGain, if I had the money, I would be getting a M3 as well. And if I had more money, I would be getting a GTR, etc.. etc..
350z was the best bang for the buck for under $50k.
Yeah, I don't mean to suggest 350z is the **** out there. Whatever you or I may have, there is always something out there that's faster, prettier, etc.. I didn't like the fact that all I did was post some picks of my new ride for people to look at, but then there are the 1 or 2 people that feels the need to squash the 350z because of jealously??? I don't know.
AGain, if I had the money, I would be getting a M3 as well. And if I had more money, I would be getting a GTR, etc.. etc..
350z was the best bang for the buck for under $50k.
BTW, beautiful car, nice colour
19-Feb-2003, 03:58 PM
#59
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: London & T.O.
Posts: 240
Originally posted by Aero
nice car, nice color, whats the size of your rims? is it stock? or are you getting an aftermarket one?
nice car, nice color, whats the size of your rims? is it stock? or are you getting an aftermarket one?
I'm replacing the stock tires though because they stuck.
