Nissan 370Z goes from 0 to 60 in 4.7 same as BMW M3
 

The other day during Thanksgiving dinner a couple of us were arguing about the 0 to 60 time of the new 332-hp 2009 Nissan 370Z as reported by CARandDRIVER. The automotive enthusiast magazine said that the new Z goes from rest to 60 in 5 seconds which seemed a bit awkward to us since the new Z is smaller, lighter and more powerful this year.

Well, to our delight Motor Trend has just released their figures and they have reported a 0 to 60 mph time of 4.7 seconds. Motor Trend also reported a quarter mile run of 13.3 seconds at 105.7 mph. Pretty impressive for a car that starts at $29,930. For arguments sake the new $57,500 BMW M3 Coupe also does 0 to 60 mph in 4.7 second and the $56,610 Lexus IS-F reports a 0 to 60 mph time of 4.6 seconds.

Check out Motor Trend’s review after the jump.

Source: eGMCarTech

http://www.egmcartech.com/wp-content...n_370z_top.jpg

Yeah time have been varied. I couldn't see this car coming in over 5 seconds tho. Sounds good to me.

I also feel like this car will be very easy to mod and respond well. The HR motor was much more friendly to bolt ons than the Revup and Non rev

really? just released?

http://www.the370z.com/nissan-370z-p...1-25-08-a.html

Welcome to last week ;) Also, take it easy with the performance claims, it seems that its more at home around 4.9s to 60...

Hello whiplash. :D

Who cares about 3/10ths of a second? All car rags will get different numbers in specific test locations which are sometimes corrected for factors...all while abusing the crap out of it! It really doesn't mean much!

The important thing is that it IS faster than the 350, and you can feel it! :driving:

I'm not gonna get into this again. Youre right, 3/10ths of a second means nothing....:ugh2:

No difference between a 4.7s car and a 5.0s car.

That will put a little kick in your pants....

You are correct. There is no discernable difference; the times are only for bragging rights.

On real roads (not the track), I cannot tell that my RX8 gets walked by a Z as it is not feasible to 'race'. Not to mention racing on public streets is very childish and ignorant!!

Thank you, but

I was being sarcastic, theres a huge difference between a 4.7s car and a 5.0 second car. Its like 150lbs or like 60hp lol. Also please dont think for a second that you're going to be able to keep up with an e92 M3 past 45 miles an hour without modifying your Z. Thats like thinking the 350Z would keep up with an e46 M3.

You will not be able to discern any difference in bumper to bumper traffic, photo radar, and bike cops lying in wait. 4.7, 5.0 seconds will not make that big of a difference under those circumstances.

On the track it MAY make a difference... depending on drivers! Offense sells tickets.. defense wins games.. Well, HP sells cars (to the mainstream consumer).....

HP and 0-60 times sell to the masses. Weight, Cornering G's, torque curves, wear ratings and trap speeds sell to enthusiasts.

Although weight has become more popular due to its widespread use in magazines...

Yeah I have also been hearing 4.7 seconds. Just remember that with these magazines they don't drive them like we do. We drive them like we stole them because we are paying for these beauties. I can deffinitely see a low 13 second 1/4 mile run and mid 4's to 60mph.

Exactly.

probably it would do 0-60 in 10 seconds, very similar to a smart for two car. rocking!

But really, i feel that it will be rounding more closely to 4.9s in a general basis which for me its very very good for the price, style and everything.
In general, it would do an excellent performance at track for all factory parts, no mods. :)

Agreed. Unfortunately all my friends have either Porsches or better, or highly modified cheaper cars, so I can't rock a stock Z and keep up. Im sure it will perform great on the track stock too.

Well, that said, as your plans for modding your Z develop let us know and share pics!!!

Maybe, but how much does a new M3 compare in price to a new 350Z. Or even a new 370Z?

Who's talking about price? When did price come into the picture. We are talking about performance. Not to mention the thread title claims that the 370z matches the performance of the M3 therefore using it as a benchmark. Yes its more expensive, yes it is faster. Also has materials that are flawless and the ride is amazing. Comes with a very nice super-high revving super-high tech engine and great weight balance. I mean yes its going to cost more with all the quality and technology on it.

I personally don't think the Z could keep up, thats all. I am far from an M3 fanboy either although I do think its a great car. I think that maybe a 370z vs e46 M3 could be interesting, but don't ask me which one I'd rather be driving on the track.

"So RCZ, why dont you shut up, leave and buy an M3!"

Because the Z is amazing value and it looks pretty damn good. In my opinion better than the e92 M3. Its lighter, smaller and the VQ engine is awesome. It is much less pretentious and loves to be modded. Because parts are cheaper to buy and because installing them will be cheaper. Because I think the M3 has lost it's way a bit from the focused car it used to be and the Z has done the exact opposite. The Z will be an awesome daily driver too, with a new nicer interior and some cool technology to boot. Nice available sound system and navigation, etc, etc.

I mean come on I could keep going, but I think we all know why we are here.

Modding a Z is FAR less complicated (power gains wise, and warranty issues wise) than the M3. I would not mind voiding my Z warranty as I know I can pay for anything that breaks. I would be MUCH more timid about modding an M3 as I would go the way of GM due to voiding it's warranty.

But the M3 still is a hawt car!

Price has a lot to do with it. Based on your statement you already know. Which was my point, the Z is an amazing value. Maybe it won't keep up with an M3 Ewhatever. But it holds it's own dollar for dollar. Which has been the bench mark for the Z since day one.

The M3 comparo is off the mark anyway. The comparison should be between the 370Z and M Coupe and Cayman S. If you look at these cars, you get a clearer picture of Nissan's intent: Delivering a 2 seat coupe that has the numbers needed to hang with the focused, German 2 seaters. Take the 0-60 times with a grain of salt, as already suggested. Look at lb/hp, skidpad, and slalom. When you figure the closest direct competitors are 20K+ above the price of the Nissan, you begin to realize it's a steal.

S.

Here's another thread where the 370Z is compared to a better competitor -- the 135i. Lets hear your thoughts.

http://www.the370z.com/nissan-370z-g....html#post5410

Good points.. of course.... Actually the BMW M coupe weighs the same as a base model M/T at 3230!!! What I do not understand is how the Z has the 54/46 weight distribution but the BMW has 50/50. That inline 6 is pretty heavy and it's a shorter car. How did BMW get 50/50 or is that just a claim just as Nissan says the Z is a perfect 50/50 with out of corner acceleration...? Any help?

Also, Road and Track's comparo did state the Z matched the Cayman S on the track, staying with it in the twisties. I do not care how fast the new Cayman S is so as long as the Z can stay with it in the twisties. I can mod the Z to be as fast as the Cayman S otherwise; all I need is a few more ponies!! :driving:

I agree with everything you said, good sir. :tup:

Couldn't have said it any better.

The Z might or might not beat an M3 without mods. But 5grand woth of mods will beat n M3
And furthermore with that. The z will still be $45k cheaper. Lol. N this is bout the 370z not 350.
Lastly the Z in 7 speed auto got 4.6 n 13.1 on the quarter. Not bad for 34k with sport pack.

FWIW, the car magazines list in very small print at the bottom of their test results that a significant difference in 0-60 times is 0.3s. Check it out some time...it's pretty interesting. They list all the significant differences including skid pad g's, top speed, 1/4 mi....

Sometimes we nit pick 1/10th of a second differences when this alone can be explained by a gust of wind or the driver farting during a gear shift.

Thus 4.8 and 5s isn't significant unless you averaged these times over many many runs. Even then, a car that runs a 4.5s 0-60 may get demolished on a curvey short track by a more agile car that runs a 0-60 in 6s. One thing I've come to appreciate lately is that straight line acceleration is a very small drop in the bucket.

Holy thread revival batman! Power isn't everything. Compared to my '03, there is a difference. That's all that matters. :-)

Well if your going to post the "best" 0-60 time posted by a magazine. We should at least compare it to the "best" time posted by the E92 M3.

In that case... the E92 M3 runs a 4.1 0-60 compared to the 4.7 of the 370z. As you can see this is CONSIDERABLY faster. So no... a 370Z can't keep up with an M3, or an IS-F for that matter.

And I agree with RCZ. 3/10ths is a lot when you are looking at cars in the 4 second range. It becomes exponentially harder to shave tenths the faster you get.

That said, 4.7 is a great time and I'm proud of the Z.

Imo.. Don't see the point in all this comparisons aka cheaper car goes just as fast or faster .

Who cares if something goes faster or that its cheaper or more expensive etc etc?



Back on topic...There was also another test from car and driver.

2009 Porsche 911 Carrera vs. 2009 BMW M3 - Coupes/Comparison Test/Reviews/Car and Driver - Car And Driver

"The 911 has statistical appeal: It’s lighter than the M3 by 380 pounds without using Millennium Falcon materials, and it keeps the pace with an identical 4.1-second 0-to-60-mph sprint despite being down two cylinders, 385 cubic centimeters, and 69 horsepower. Midrange torque even feels stronger than that of the cammy, not-much-below-4000-rpm V-8 in the M3."

LOL! With this test the M3 is now the cheap (er) car that goes just as fast. The cycle continues.. :icon17: