Well I wasn't talking about the performance end of the equation, just the
design. I couldn't address the 350Z performance until I actually drove one (cold
day in hell, that thing is just too ugly for me). But I will take exception to
the idea that Zs (and especially later Zs) were not sporting cars and can't
compete on the track or a twisty bit of road with a Roadster. It just ain't so.
While they weren't bare bones cars, they still offered excellent performance.
What they were were GT cars that offered sportscar performance with GT
amenities. And yes as the years went by the amenities list got longer and the
cars got heavier, but the cars got better too. Each model got faster, despite
the DEQ and DOT BS they had to deal with. While the Roadster is a great car,
there is a reason it didn't last into the 80s and 90s (as, God help it, the MGB
did) and that was because Datsun had a *better* car to replace it. If you want a
real ugly thought, imagine a 1983 Roadster with all the emissions and smog crap,
and the bumpers, and standardized ride heights, etc. Not a pretty sight and not
a fast or quick car by any means. Were the Zs more of a "compromise" car than
the Roadsters? Yep, as mentioned people's expectations were evolving and the
Roadster had already started Datsun down the compromise path. But let's do a
comparison that will show the basic car's performance envelope and see if the Z
lost anything to the Roadster as it evolved.
First off, for this comparison you'd have to define what mods are allowed and
what aren't. Because a bone stock Roadster running stock SUs, OEM tires, and OEM
springs and shocks is *never* going to handle or perform the way most folks'
Roadsters do today, with 15" 50-series tires, comp springs, performance shocks,
and Solex kits. The benchmark that most Roadster owners think of for their cars
today is in fact not one of a true stock Roadster but rather a sort of street
prepared state of tune Roadster. And a bone stock Roadster (even a 2-liter) will
not outrun a Z, say a bone stock ZXR for instance (probably not even a well
prepped stock class 240Z). So let's say street prepared type rules, any DOT
treaded tires, any replacement shocks, any flexible replacement suspension
bushings, any replacement springs, and any replacement sway bars. These are
basically the mods most older car owners tend to make to their cars anyway.
Since we are allowing this for both sides of the equation, the differences
should balance out. Also let's continue this to allow Street Prepared engine
mods etc., Now we have an apples and apples comparison. And now a Z will eat a
Roadster alive. literally. And the later the Z, the more likely that is (yes,
really folks). It's simple, look at racing history and look at track times, they
kept going down. The cars kept getting faster. The absolute fastest stock block
Roadster in the world will not get close to the track times of the Newman/Sharp
280ZXT (which ran a stock block), not even close. And according to Bob, the
Newman/Sharp 300ZXT (again a stock block) was even faster. As Bob has said
several times to me, "each new car was faster than the previous car." According
to the man who should know better than any of us, Datsun just kept making them
better and faster.
But let's get even more down to earth and basic. Let's take a current IT 240Z
and compare its times on a known track to a Roadster's times. And let's let the
Roadster run over class, say within current production rules. Here's the ITS
record, held by a 240Z; ITS-class 1:41.983-time 89.662-speed Chet
Wittel-driver 70 Datsun 240Z-car 99 ARRC-event. That's a 1:41.983 lap time, on
the new configuration! That's fast, really fast. I know these folks and I know
for a fact that car is one of the few absolutely legal ITS cars, no cheating and
no tricks. And he recently set a slightly faster lap than that at the 2001 AARC
championships. Anyone have a time for a Roadster on the new Road Atlanta track
that even comes close, in any class? Maybe I'm wrong but i doubt that there will
be anything even close, and if it is it will be from a car modified to the
limit, or beyond.
I'm not badmouthing Roadsters here (heck I want one so bad I can taste it), it's
just that the image of the later cars (Z or otherwise) being somehow less of a
performance car is BS, and I hate to see it propagated. Most econoboxes of today
will outrun most pure sports cars of the 60s and 70s. The only thing an older
sports car like the Roadster gives you that they don't is a more visceral feel,
more tinker time, and a lot more class. I'm betting that the new Z, as ugly as
it is, will continue to improve the bloodlines as far as performance goes. Maybe
I am wrong, maybe its performance envelope is as bad as its design, but I doubt
it. Meanwhile, anyone want to run a similarly prepared Roadster against my
"bloated" 82 280ZXT at Thunderhill sometime for pinkslips? As I say, I really
want to own a Roadster. :-)
Okay, I'm off my soapbox and will let this thread about 350Zs die now. :-)
> > 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
--
Marc Sayer
82 280ZXT
71 510 2.5 Trans Am vintage racer
/// datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net mailing list
|