Nissan 370Z Forum - View Single Post - The *REAL* official 370Z test drive thread

s2kap2 · 02-15-2009, 09:44 PM

Just drove an auto/base model (the only one they had). I will be replacing my Honda S2000 so all comparisons will be with the Honda.

Here is my (long) review.

This is beginning to sound cliché but the car looks better in person. Looking at magazine as well as computer images, I found myself focused on the odd boomerang shaped headlight and taillights. In person, the whole design comes together, and you think to yourself, “ah, now I get it.” The base model wheels also look very nice in person. The way the spokes bend in towards the hub center is quite nice. Much better than the flat, one dimensional shape when viewed head-on.

Once inside, the seated position feels like I am sitting very low, with doors and dash looming large around me, likely exaggerated by the high sills. The seats are very supportive and for the most part comfortable. Just different from the excellent S2000 seats that I am used to. No better, no worse. I still don’t care for the 3- pimple gauges atop the dash but they are effective and easy to see. The speedo and tach look nice and I really like the new back lighting. Much better than the old orange look. The info center to the left is almost useless.

One item that I was not expecting was the way the starter button works. In the S2000, the starter button activates only the starter motor. When cold, you might have to hold it a second longer or hit it again….just like a regular car. With the Z, you just hit the button and the brain takes care of everything else. I do absolutley love being able to keep the fob in my pocket.

When I fired the motor, I was expecting more. I drove a G37 coupe and the exhaust note at idle and under load, contrary to luxury sensibilities, seems louder and a little more aggressive???

Once underway, the engine is very willing. I wonder if the DBW has been adjusted to feel stronger that it really is on tip-in? Acceleration, even under light throttle is very effortless, as if the engine is yawning and saying, “can I go back to sleep? Wake me up when you need to actually do something.” The ride is firm but a little floaty compared to the S. The steering is also too over-boosted for my tastes. On the open road, the Z would clearly put some distance between itself and my S on a straight road. It makes lots of power and I was taking it easy. The numbers indicate more lateral road holding than the S but it simply is not as balanced or communicative as the S. These traits however are not always bad. The Honda is a fantastic car but too narrowly focused. A casual glance at the steering wheel puts it into another lane and you feel every rock on the road. The Z is the better long distance car.

I would describe the 2 cars like this; The S2000 is a lean Olympic sprinter, the Z is a stocky guy in a biker bar with a shaved head, who’s going to kick your a$$ if you look at him.

02-15-2009, 09:44 PM	#50 (permalink)
s2kap2 Base Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: oregon Posts: 12 Drives: s2000 Rep Power: 16	Just drove an auto/base model (the only one they had). I will be replacing my Honda S2000 so all comparisons will be with the Honda. Here is my (long) review. This is beginning to sound cliché but the car looks better in person. Looking at magazine as well as computer images, I found myself focused on the odd boomerang shaped headlight and taillights. In person, the whole design comes together, and you think to yourself, “ah, now I get it.” The base model wheels also look very nice in person. The way the spokes bend in towards the hub center is quite nice. Much better than the flat, one dimensional shape when viewed head-on. Once inside, the seated position feels like I am sitting very low, with doors and dash looming large around me, likely exaggerated by the high sills. The seats are very supportive and for the most part comfortable. Just different from the excellent S2000 seats that I am used to. No better, no worse. I still don’t care for the 3- pimple gauges atop the dash but they are effective and easy to see. The speedo and tach look nice and I really like the new back lighting. Much better than the old orange look. The info center to the left is almost useless. One item that I was not expecting was the way the starter button works. In the S2000, the starter button activates only the starter motor. When cold, you might have to hold it a second longer or hit it again….just like a regular car. With the Z, you just hit the button and the brain takes care of everything else. I do absolutley love being able to keep the fob in my pocket. When I fired the motor, I was expecting more. I drove a G37 coupe and the exhaust note at idle and under load, contrary to luxury sensibilities, seems louder and a little more aggressive??? Once underway, the engine is very willing. I wonder if the DBW has been adjusted to feel stronger that it really is on tip-in? Acceleration, even under light throttle is very effortless, as if the engine is yawning and saying, “can I go back to sleep? Wake me up when you need to actually do something.” The ride is firm but a little floaty compared to the S. The steering is also too over-boosted for my tastes. On the open road, the Z would clearly put some distance between itself and my S on a straight road. It makes lots of power and I was taking it easy. The numbers indicate more lateral road holding than the S but it simply is not as balanced or communicative as the S. These traits however are not always bad. The Honda is a fantastic car but too narrowly focused. A casual glance at the steering wheel puts it into another lane and you feel every rock on the road. The Z is the better long distance car. I would describe the 2 cars like this; The S2000 is a lean Olympic sprinter, the Z is a stocky guy in a biker bar with a shaved head, who’s going to kick your a$$ if you look at him.