Originally Posted by takemorepills

A couple of counterpoints....

On the triple gauges of the ProtoZ, I think you mean turbo RPM gauge? That's a clear sign that the ProtoZ has the 400HP VR30 in it, as the 400HP VR30 utilizes turbine speed sensors, whereas the 300HP VR30 doesn't. Really a bit of data that wouldn't be very useful to the avg Joe, and if you do a turbo upgrade you may lose that function and have a useless gauge. Maybe the 300HP variants will have an alternate gauge there (unless all Z's use the 400HP VR) - I guess it goes back to why is it there in the first place? why do i care about it? It seems gimmicky considering there aren't two of them, one for each turbo.

As for tuned reliability. I have never seen any German turbo car or Japanese turbo car have perfect reliability when tuned. Tuning a turbo car makes significant gains and really pushes many things. I owned a 2016 GTI DSG with a JB4 and I popped the DSG at 20K miles. There's plenty of YT content on how unreliable a slightly older turbo BMWs are.
The issues some VR30's have are not out of line for any turbo car. Heck, compare a tuned VR30 to a turbo VQ37 and I am quite certain the VQ37 can have just as many issues. - I'm no stranger to tuning and unreliability. This is why I'm still NA. I like to leave the car whatever aspiration it was from the factory, but this is based on some info i got from guys who work on both VR30s and VQ37s. It was enough for one to mention he'd rather swap a VQ back into the new Z.

Keep a few things in perspective: Many enthusiasts who tune their cars hard also realize something may break. The VR30 will not be expensive, for an enthusiast, to repair if they break something. It's been out for a while now, and parts will be plentiful. If you want really fast and reliable, probably need to look at a recent Corvette, they are very fast and somewhat similar to a Z. No boost means they are fairly reliable. - not blowing anything out of perspective. just see last comment about anecdotal evidence of the VR not being the best Nissan platform they've made. Maybe they'll make improvements to it.

When I was researching cars in 2015, I seriously looked at the WRX. WRX's don't do huge HP gains like German cars, and they have a bunch of issues like ring lands, wonky fueling, and their transmissions aren't all that great either.If you put $3000 into a GTI and $3000 into a WRX, the GTI would make much more power than a WRX. Same for a BMW. - I'm not a horsepower guy so you're missing me with this point here. Also, specifically the STis have issues with ringland failure (also why that's not my daily and a WRX is). Also much of the reason you're dealing with smaller power gains is because it is a smaller engine, and the STi specifically is leaned out from the factory (also dumb) so to make comparable gains to even a FA20 WRX you have to upgrade the fueling system.

As for the Supra, I have a HUGE issue with BMW making it. I would totally buy one if it were an actual Toyota. Toyota cars do NOT respond to tuning very well at all, but they are RELIABLE. I'd buy a Toyota-made Supra in a hot second because I'd feel it'd be reliable for 20 years. The BMW Supra is great because it inherits BMW tunability and can be easily tuned for big gains with modest $$$, but I wouldn't want it past it's warranty. - Toyota specifically mentioned that they did their own breakdown of the powertrain and tested it themselves to see if it would pass their standard for factory reliability, which it does. So your point here is kinda confusing. You'd buy Toyota-made Supra but it wont respond well to tuning, but since BMW made the engine which is more responsive to tuning and passing Toyota Reliability standards you wouldn't buy it? I don't see what difference it makes as to who build the motor. Without these collabs, we would have less sports cars to choose from. Again I'm brand-agnostic, so if it's a good product I'd buy it. The only product that is good that I wouldn't go near is a Mustang, and we all know why.

The new Z is all Nissan, and that is a huge benefit. The VR motor in the Z is just as responsive as German turbo engines. I have scoured the Q50/60 forums for VR30 issues and they are manageable and quite typical of any turbo car that is tuned. I have also seen that Nissan has made an actual effort to improve the VR30 reliability. (I generally don't trust Nissan here as I have owned a few of their vehicles that had issues that are never resolved) The repairs made on the VR30 are usually done with updated parts, and the belt-throwing issue is quite manageable itself.
After constantly having my GTI in the shop (10 times for repairs) over the course of 3 years I was so happy to buy my Q60, and in 2.5 years of owning it I have never ever had one issue with it. If the new Z fell somewhere between my Q60 and my GTI in reliability I would be OK with that. - I just want to point out that while your Q60 is reliable compared to the GTI, Compared to the outgoing Z, it is pretty unreliable. Most owners with Z34s untouched have had CSC issues, but for the autos, literally no major issues at all. So I would say as a current Z owner, that's a drop in current reliability standards. Comparing that to the little data I have on Supras, it still doesn't look the best. My tuner picked up an A91 recently so we will see what he thinks about it, and a friend of mine has the release edition A90 with a downpipe and a tune and no issues yet. Not a large sample size so we'll see. (edit - your profile says Q60 3.7, so can i really trust your opinion on the VR?)

BTW I 100% agree with you about the MT...I was surprised when I learned about the CSC. The last Z I replaced a clutch on didn't have such a weirdo setup, but that was 22 years ago! Knowing Nissan, they'll continue using the same, crappy CSC. Many Z enthusiasts believe they can maintain the CSC through fluid changes until the clutch needs replacement, it's just a quirk of owning a Nissan, I guess. Again, if the Supra was made by Toyota, I'd be all over that! - I've actually had Master failures on my car. I did keep up with fluid maintenance and the original CSC was fine when i did a clutch swap (because track work), but after two master failures (one causing a nasty clutch explosion, i went with the CMAK since it was now an option for me. It should have been like that from the factory.

The manual transmission itself though is trash. whatever they changed from the DE 350Z to the ones we run now, they need to revert that. My original was replaced under warranty, and even the 2014 MY transmission i have under the car still has syncro issues.