Road & Track: 370Z vs Cayman S
 

Okay, hope THIS hasn't been posted:

Road & Track Magazine - Clash of the Coupes: 2009 Nissan 370Z vs. 2008 Porsche Cayman S (4/2009)

I am rather happy with the results. I still think the Z is the better choice regardless of price. The Cayman is too bland...it handles well and looks good, but its too mainstream and the interior isn't exactly astonishing. Porsche needs a serious update to their interiors...the flat pannel isnt cutting it.

I think the Z is a lot more fun around a track AND around town. Its more special too.

That would be kinda like going backwards for Pcars. As the 996 and 986's had curvey interiors etc.. Which many in the Porsche crowd disliked. ;)

Totally agree on the flat panel. I sports car interior should be hugging you; that flat panel stuff makes me think of the mustang.

If they tested against the 2009 Cayman S, the Z would have been creamed. Against the 08 Cayman S it was able to hold its own. But it would have been more competitive if not for the heat issue.

R&T exposed the Z's overheating oil issue. As noted in this thread, this issue is the Z's "achilles heel":
http://www.the370z.com/track-autocro...eally-bad.html

It seems this test car was not one of the early "ringer" press cars which had oil coolers installed. Nissan needs to fix this on the 2010 cars, otherwise the Z will not be track competitive!

I agree. I think I recall seeing 0-60 in 4.5 sec for the new cayman with pdk...

or people can just add the oil cooler if they want to track the car. thats what I would do.

Shouldnt need to have to add an oil cooler, though. Its a band aid for something Nissan will hopefully fix.

I'm kind of surprised on acceleration numbers on the Z when it comes to 100mph and up. I would think it would be faster than the 2008 Cayman S when it comes to tripple digits.

Z is begging for a shorter FD. 3rd gear on that car is just too long.

O.K. So.... The Z did 4.7 0-60 in MotorTrend. It is still within spitting distance.

I found a 0-60 at 5.2 kind of odd. We've already seen 5.1, 4.9, 4.8, 4.7 and 5.3. This range is pretty extreme even taking into account variations due to elevation and temp.

why would you assume so? the VQ obviously chokes and has a hard time revving up to give the extra hp. still gotta remember the VQ is still a bored out version of a 3.0 liter. nissan needs a new engine soon

arent the numbers under 5 when the car is rolling?

^When it comes to 0-60, i dont really care what it does. When it comes to conditions, yes they can make up to 1 second difference in 1/4 mile. When i was comparing the numbers that they have on the PDF file, i am assuming both cars are tested on same day. I really don't look at the numbers just to know what they do. I like seeing comparisons to other similar performing car to get an fairly accurate idea how fast the car is. Even a car with bad 0-60 or even 1/4 mile time can outperform a different car is tripple digit speeds. The perfect example is stock Evo/STI vs 6MT 03-06 G35.

That is not the reason. HR motors perform beautifully all the way till redline. My bimmer chockes after 6k rpm and has 1000rpm (from 6k-7k) dead spot. :(
The reason is that the gears are too tall for the G37/370z. from 2nd gear all the way to fifth are very long considering the car has a high-reving motor. If the gear ratios were the same as the first gen G35 with 6th gear actually being a gear not overdrive, then this car would have been much much quicker. As people start putting 4.01 FD on this car which i will probably do, you will see how much difference it makes in the acceleration.

Not with most. The best is a 4.7 but only Motor Trend got that. Car and Driver just got a 4.8 here http://www.the370z.com/nissan-370z-g...stice-gxp.html. Edmunds and Motorweek both got a 5.1 but they tend to be about .2 slower than everyone else on almost all cars. Road and Track originally got a 5.1 but blamed elevation for at least .1 of that and have gotten a smidge slower here. I just don't recall number varying this widely on most cars. Best example would be something like a Mustang usually which stays between 5.1 and 5.3 on everybody's reviews. We seem to have a full 1/2 second swing with the nissan. Makes me wonder if it might be overly temp or elevation sensitive. But another problem in this article is that they have a 3530 curb weight, the heaviest I've ever seen for a 370Z. :confused:

^every NA car is elevation sensative.

hence the term "overly" :D

wow 4.7! my car doesnt even get a 4.7 lol so how do they get a 4.7 then 1/4 mile in high 13's? they're either lying about the 4.7, or what ^^ says above that 3-up gears are too long.

My g35 made 0.6 second difference in 1/4 mile in 2500 elevation difference with very similar weather conditions. :) So i guess overly is the right term. :D

MT got 4.7 and their 1/4 mile was not high 13's, it was 13.3 secs. C&D got 4.8 and their 1/4 mile, if you download the test sheet, was 13.4.

The others who got low 5's 0-60 were the ones with higher ~13.7 sec 1/4 miles. In this Road&Track test they specifically say the 90 degree heat was an issue that hurt the VQ's performance, which may explain the relatively poor 0-60 in 5.2 secs.

You clearly missed my point - all I am saying is that 2009 cayman would have performed even better than 2008. 0.2 secs could mean one or two car lengths, perhaps even more by the time they hit 100mph. BTW, I am NOT a fan of cayman.

True, but at least Nissan via NISMO should make these coolers available for sale. Otherwise there's always the potential for some dealer to give you hassles on warranty.

OTOH, the Z is marketed as serious sports car. This heat issue is a weak spot that Nissan knows about. Having the car go into limp mode and lowering the rev limit to 6500 is Nissan's fix, but it cripples the car's performance. You don't need to add oil & diff coolers to most other cars if you want to track your car.

oh okay. my bad. i read so many numbers i cant even remember.

I live south of Houston, Texas. :(

Motor Trend got a 4.3 and a 12.7 Q/M out of your car.

2008 BMW M3 vs. 2008 Lexus IS F vs. 2008 Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG - Specifications - Comparison - Motor Trend

This does not bother me much as it seems to remind me of the articles that painted the 350z as being 3600 pounds. I SERIOUSLY doubt this car is as heavy as a Maxima...

I, for one, believe Nissan's numbers from the factory with the addition of the Sports pack (being about 50 pounds)....

The curb weight is listed as 3360 lbs, about the same as in the MT & C&D tests. It's the test weight that is shown as 3530, but that includes the driver weight. R&T always includes the weight of their drivers in the "test" weight.

Then they need to start using jockeys or MiniMe as test drivers! :mad:

:D

Well when they test the new 09 cayman i'm pretty sure it will out perform the 370z. If I could afford the 09 cayman I would probably get it, but then again I I would spend an extra 10k or so to get the GTR.:icon18:

Honestly it does not matter if the 09 Cayman S beats the Z. Some examples are more than 2X the price of a new Z. Ask klubbheads, I am the biggest advocate for the new Caymans. You honestly have to drive one to experience how a sports car should be built. It is truly that good. If I could afford one right now I would buy it in a heartbeat. I would take it over a Z06 or a 911 S.

The Z is an exceptional performer and given a slightly better driver in the Z I would bet that it would outperform the Cayman, 911, or most other earthly sports cars. I cant tell you how many driver I have seen in 500 + HP cars get their asses handed to them by 200 HP Boxsters and S2000's.

So for the price it commands I would sure as hell expect the Cayman to outperform the Z. But the Z is a damn good car. Best bang for your buck out there. Even better than a Z06? I think so.

My G35 Coupe was an absolute POS reliability wise and after the treatment I have received at the Nissan dealer for our 350Z, I vowed to never buy another Nissan product again.

But again these threads go on forever and ever on every forum. It comes down to whichever car you like and can afford. I think today car buying is an experience that continues throughout your ownership. I found that it is highly emotional. I have owned a number of sports cars and I found that I like Porsches the best.

I have to agree......Porsche is an amazing machine. But I feel secure in knowing that while under the same breath the Z is talked about in the same circles as Porsche....this is Fantastic for the 370. I like playing in this sandbox.

A Sports car is not always about off the line 0-60 - 1/4 mile times, heck if you really wanted that straight line rush then you should be looking in the Dodge, Pontiac Showrooms.

The Z is a about driver experience, control, cornering, tight/taught machine, with a little bit of power to kick your pants. Thanks NISSAN. I'm enjoy the ride!

Honestly, the Z06 doesnt have much bang for the buck on the track for GM. The C6 with the Z51 package has your true bang for the buck. For 45K or so, you get all the power 99% of people doing road racing will need with a great suspension package to go with it. You can easily get a used C6 Z51 with low miles (10-20K) for 30K or so. Way better bang for the buck, but, of course, its used.

I'd say the best bang for the buck today is the regular C6. A 430 HP, close to 4 second car, great handling, and good looks that you can currently get for $40,000. That and the Base Z with the sport option are the two value leaders in my book.