One point we are all missing here is that all Z cars are just 2 door taxis. The
last true sports car built by Nissan was built in the 1960s. Z car guys try to
tell you things like the fact that Z cars outsold the Roadsters indicated that
the
Z was a better sports car, what they fail to have noticed is that the all the Z
proved was that people no longer wanted true sports cars, all they wanted was
comfy fat boulevard cruisers. A true sports car is by definition a lightweight
sporting car whose design emphasis is on handling, something that is
challenging,
rewarding and fun to drive. A sports car in it's purest form is something like a
series 1,2 or 3 Lotus 7.
Certainly there was still some element of 'sports car' in the 240Z, but the
older
the Z got the less of a sports car it became. And now we come to the 350Z, a
pair
of reclining lounge chairs on 4 wheels, fat and bloated, stuffed to the brim
with
driver aids like ABS, power steering, ridiculously over-powered power brakes,
etc., etc., all designed to make it easier and softer to drive, but ultimately
less rewarding and less fun to drive. What Nissan have created is the
Anti-Sports
Car, this is a car that is everything a true sports car shouldn't be.
Z cars are fine cruisers, I actually owned a 300ZX a while back and it was the
best long distance cruiser I have ever seen, but present it with a nice twisty
bit
of road and it's limitations were obvious. Zs need to be judged for what they
are,
comparing them to a sports car achieves nothing. Unfortunately only Honda and
Mazda build anything close to a real sports car these days.
Bruce Willis said it best in 'Pulp Fiction', "Z's dead baby!".
Time to stop wasting breath talking about Nissan's new plastic pose-mobile and
get
back to talking about real sports cars.
My 2 cents worth. (Australian currency that is, worth about 1 cent American)
Alan Bent - Mapleton, Queensland, Australia
1964 Datsun Fairlady 4-SP310-00134 (real sports car !)
1966 Datsun Fairlady SP311-00925 (real sports car !)
1966 Datsun Fairlady SP311-01060 (real sports car !)
1963 Nissan Cedric G31-3-07024 (4 door Z car)
1962 Datsun 320 Pick-Up 320-2-00677 (Z car with a big trunk)
1965 Nissan Silvia CSP311-70231
1963 Datsun Bluebird P312-3-32984
1963 Datsun Bluebird P312-3-39741
1964 Nissan Cedric Wagon 4-WP31-50620 (5 door Z wagon)
1964 Nissan Cedric Wagon 4-WP31-51579
1965 Datsun Bluebird Wagon WP410-
1965 Datsun Bluebird P411-021358 (designed by Pininfarina, just like a
Ferrari)
1969 Datsun Super Six G130-005415
1972 Hodaka Wombat 125 Motorbike (a one cylinder Z car)
1988 John Deere 755 Tractor (the source of many styling cues
for
the new Z)
Early Datsun Homepage http://www.geocities.com/olddat
Nissan Silvia Homepage http://www.angelfire.com/ns/silvia
Planet Cedric http://nav.to/planetcedric
Datsun Sports Owners http://DSOAnews.tripod.com/index.html
Alex Avery wrote:
> Marc, sorry to disagree with you so vehemently, but you started thisk, so
> here goes.
> Marc wrote:
> >A designer looking to develop a new Z could have come up with the 350Z or the
> >Aston Martin DB7 ... One is cheap, immature, overdone, and flashy. It
> panders to a
> >"target" audience. The other is elegant, stylish, refined, and a true styling
> >achievement.
>
> Posh! I like the DB7, but I'm liking the 350Z quite a bit at this
> point--it's a decent evolution of the Z car lineage (FYI--I hated the 350Z
> design when it was first unveiled). The fact that the design revolted me
> at first but is now winning me over shows that it is a fresh design, much
> like the Ford Taurus was revolting when it was the first "bubble car" out
> there, but now looks "normal" and pleasing. (anyone else remember that
> period in the early 80s?)
>
> >that the 350Z is "targeting children and
> >teens, the other targets adults. Nissan has shown its true colors in this
> >effort, as far as I am concerned, pandering to style instead of creating
> it. The
> >pricing reinforces this idea, being price pointed to the demographics of the
> >target audience."
>
> Ok, so the 350Z is now the Joe Camel of the car world? What, Nissan should
> commit Hari Kari by building another stupidly expensive sports car that
> nobody will buy or can afford? The pricing is, in fact, an attempt to
> return to the Z cars lower-priced GT roots not to mention return Nissan to
> profitability(or do you forget that the 240Zs sold for under $4k back in
> 1970? Was Nissan 'pandering' to teens back then?) Besides, to compare any
> Nissan with any Aston Martin is absurd. They exist in completely different
> car buying universes. Apples and oranges.
>
> >When the 240Z came out it made a bold statement and set style trends for a
> >generation. This new 350Z is doing none of that. It is following style trends
> >set by others and trying to cash in on the Z name, period. It is just another
> >video-game car. Luckily for it, "the emperor's new clothes" syndrome is still
> >alive and well.
>
> The 240Z robbed plenty of cars for styling cues (Toyota 2000GT, Ferraris,
> Jaguars). It wasn't that bold a design. What was bold was selling a great
> looking coupe that performed great and didn't cost an arm and a leg. That
> is the Z car's legacy, and a legacy that Nissan forgot when it was making
> that last, bloated Z thing that cost $50,000 and didn't give back $50k in
> performance. I think the new Z is evolutionary and I for one am beginning
> to covet them.
>
> Just MY $0.02
> Alex Avery
>
> /// datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net mailing list
> /// Send admin requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or go to
> /// http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
> /// Send list postings to datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net
/// datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net mailing list
|