I used to have an '07 MKV GTI that I loved. Not sure if there is a better FWD car out there for the $$. I bought it brand new, paid ~22k. 200HP, 207ft/lb. tq. (it should be pointed out that a $500 chip REALLY brings these cars to life)

I am not a fanboy of any platform by any means, but the fit/finish of the GTI is world class. Felt like I was driving a much more expensive car.

Not knocking the GTI. A friend of mine has one and it is a blast! But I would rather see it put up against other FI hot hatches (Mazdaspeed3, MINI S, for example).

With the $hitty tires that came with the Z, the car is downright scary when pushed to the limit in stock form. If you think your Z handles good, throw a set of real tires on it before you make any judgement.

Motor Trend and Car & Driver are a biased magazines! I just get them because I almost get them for free.

it's a handling and feel comparison, so lap times and numbers are irrelevant. They are not comparing which cars are the fastest, rather which cars are more rewarding and fun to drive at the limits. a car can be slow but very fun to drive at its limits. or a car can be very fast but downright scary when driven hard. a viper for example is faster than a boxster, but the boxster is a better handler because it's more balanced and more confidence-inspiring at its limits. it's not about laptimes, 0-60, or how many g on a skidpad. overall, their list makes a lot of sense. however, the inclusion of the z06 and gti are bizzare. the z06 based on all i've read is very scary and twitchy at its limit and very difficult to tame with over 500hp going to the rear wheels just ready to fishtail at any moment in the corner. the gti handles very good for a fwd car, but i'm pretty sure it's still not as balanced as the z, or the lancer evo, or the mazda mx-5

Not to mention the MX5 too, i guess there are many good handling cars and his makes choosing very hard. I have driven a 370Z and they handle great!

What did you expect. Wasn't that test won by the Porsche Boxster Spyder? That shouldn't even be the best handling Porsche under 100k (which should be the cayman/ cayman S). It has a roof. Structural rigidity FTW!

It's easy to get bent out of shape by the C&D review. I suspect the Z didn't get considered for the test because of the brake failure in their earlier test. Annoying as it is, I can certainly understand how that could rule us out in their minds. As we all agree, handling is a very subjective experience.

I don't race and never plan to. So my subjective experienced is based on sub 100 MPH driving (80 to 90+ since we have some high speed limits here) and hopefully, less than 20 panic stops in 5 minutes.

We should also consider that we are a very biased group when it comes to our cars. It is a slap in the face not even to make the list of cars tested.

Another point has been bugging me snce readng the C&D brake reports. How come Consumer Reports and others have never seen brake failure or fade in their tests? The answer, of course, is that they use tests that emulate extreme real world driving conditions, not the different stresses that tracking creates.

Does anyone really believe that you drive a Z, even a Nismo out of the dealership and onto the track? You don't have to be an automotive genius to know that brake pads designed for daily driving are probably going to be engineered for long life and low dust; not the priorities when racing. That being said, it is still worrisome that C&D did find that a stock Z suffered total brake failure after repeated hard braking. It bothers me that they discovered that weakness, maybe enough to put SS brake lines and racing fluid on my street car.

Ok, so maybe it was the brakes that turned C&D off. I don't know. I do know that C&D and R&T over the years have shown very strong feelings for certain cars. R&T had a love affair with the 240Z. They appear to be pretty fond of the 350 and 370. If memory serves (meaning I may have imagined this), C&D was not a big 240Z fan back in the day. In fact, in those days C&D had a heavy bias for American cars. I stopped reading C&D years ago for that reason. They seemed to be in Detroit's back pocket. Now, I am not sure who their big advertisers are, but there could be a correlation between the amount of love they show a car and the ad budget of the companies that buy ads. I don't know. It just seems to me that given the fact that the Z is a popular sports car well under $100k, it should have been on that list of cars tested.

it also has to do with what media cars are available at the time for them to test. but yea, the caymanS is one of the best handling cars i've ever driven. the Z's are great, no doubt, but there is something different about the porsche. it somehow blends everyday drivability with sheer driving excitement and split second reflexes, it's sad porsche holds it back so the 911 won't be outdone by it...

Maybe a RUF version of the cayman S would be up your alley. I'm sure they would know just what to do to make the porsche cayman S one sick *** sports car.

Had to jump back in here to drop this off for you. :)

RUF 3400 K Cayman Test Drive

well yea no doubt, but they were talking about production sports cars, not tuner cars and for under $100k which i doubt any RuF is (and rightfully so). i believe RuF is the one who is dropping the engine out to swap in 3.8L innards in cayman's now. i know there is one out there. anyway, back on subject, after driving about half of those cars (many of them very hard when safe to do so) i can't argue with that list. the GTR gets me going because i'm a nissan fan and it ranks at the top of my list because of that too. but as a purist's driving car, it's not as rewarding to drive, nor as communicative.

I can't believe you guys are still crying over the C&D article. Don't get all your panties in a bunch. One thing I do agree with was the purpose car and driver had. Everyone is claiming track ready cars. NISMO stands for track ready. The camaro claims nurburgring testing that makes it track ready, etc etc etc... now c&d is saying, ur claiming a stock track car, let's see how you stack up. Unmodded, the NISMO FAILED. Done deal, get over it. It was enough of an issue for nissan to make high friction r-spec pads a $580 option. So in this case C&D did there job and with the new brake pads, no more problem.
The Z is not perfect. At 40k. It will be outshined by many a sportscar on the track. It doesn't make it a bad car. Its a great car. "For The Price." The self righteous bias toward your own vehicles gets boring after a while cuz no car is perfect. I'm sure even lambos have flaws.

I feel you... I'm just sayin the RUF takes it there as far as your statement of the cayman being undertuned to save face on the 911. But anyway... yeah back to topic

1st - Boxster. No surprise here. Having owned one, I can attest to that.
2nd - Lotus. C'mon, it's a go cart. Of course. I'm surprised it's second actually.

4th - M3. Really? Over a 370? pffffffffffffft I don't think so.

i could believe that one, i drove the piss out of my friend's 335i coupethis past weekend and it was a great car to drive (thought i could feel the weight), i can only image how much better the M version is