have you lost your mind!eaglecatcher wrote:Z>STi
just a little bit though
S2000 or 350Z?
No, it depends what you're racing on.
Road course with long sweeping corners, Z > STI. Road course with sharp corners, STI > Z.
AWD is great, but it isn't God's gift to mankind. It has it's fare share of flaws. Like it's natural tendency to understeer (and no the GTR is not true AWD).
Road course with long sweeping corners, Z > STI. Road course with sharp corners, STI > Z.
AWD is great, but it isn't God's gift to mankind. It has it's fare share of flaws. Like it's natural tendency to understeer (and no the GTR is not true AWD).
Only girly men drag, throw in some curves and I'm in.
How so?Brakefade wrote:and no the GTR is not true AWD
Also, more stats:
350Z = 300 hp @ 6400 rpm
STI = 293 hp @ 6000 rpm
350Z = 260 ft-lb @ 4800 rpm
STI = 290 ft-lb @ 4400 rpm
And I suppose this is relevant to the thread-
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 9691738555
along with this-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5k_7guprQk
-
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 7337
- Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 9:52 am
- Cars: 05 Mazda 3 GT
- Location: Hiding behind the dancing Peter Griffin
- Contact:
notice how in both vids, the S2k had better lap timesEcmslee wrote:How so?Brakefade wrote:and no the GTR is not true AWD
Also, more stats:
350Z = 300 hp @ 6400 rpm
STI = 293 hp @ 6000 rpm
350Z = 260 ft-lb @ 4800 rpm
STI = 290 ft-lb @ 4400 rpm
And I suppose this is relevant to the thread-
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 9691738555
along with this-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5k_7guprQk
- eaglecatcher
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 9441
- Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:04 am
- Cars: '90 300ZXTT 5MT
- Location: Ithaca, NY
I meant the 300ZXTT. I would take the STi over the 350Z any day. But not the 300ZX heheEcmslee wrote:How so?Brakefade wrote:and no the GTR is not true AWD
Also, more stats:
350Z = 300 hp @ 6400 rpm
STI = 293 hp @ 6000 rpm
350Z = 260 ft-lb @ 4800 rpm
STI = 290 ft-lb @ 4400 rpm
And I suppose this is relevant to the thread-
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 9691738555
along with this-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5k_7guprQk
stats:
95 300ZXTT 3299lbs
04 STi 3263lbs
300ZX: 300hp 6400rpm
STi: 300hp 6000rpm
300ZX: 283 ft/lbs 3400rpm
STi: 300ft/lbs 4000rpm
pretty close numbers. I'm not sure where you got the other sti numbers, but I found those on edmunds. maybe different years.
The only reason I'd take the Z, is because I love the look of those cars, and they driver really well. Never driven an STi though, but the Z is practically glued to the road. If I was getting a track car, It'd probably be an STi or an Evo
Z1 Intake
Z1 2.5" Test pipes
HKS 65mm Hi-Power Exhaust
AMS Short Shifter
SZ Subframe Spacers
HKS Vein Pressure Converter
DDM Tuning 6000k HIDs
Z1 2.5" Test pipes
HKS 65mm Hi-Power Exhaust
AMS Short Shifter
SZ Subframe Spacers
HKS Vein Pressure Converter
DDM Tuning 6000k HIDs
- eaglecatcher
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 9441
- Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:04 am
- Cars: '90 300ZXTT 5MT
- Location: Ithaca, NY
I would still consider that AWD. If all 4 wheels can drive the car, then it is, for all intensive purposes, AWD. maybe less that some other cars, but its still an AWD car.Sypher wrote:the GTR's main drive wheels are teh rear wheels and power is given to the front wheels only when slip is detected (I guess that's what he means)Ecmslee wrote:How so?Brakefade wrote:and no the GTR is not true AWD
Z1 Intake
Z1 2.5" Test pipes
HKS 65mm Hi-Power Exhaust
AMS Short Shifter
SZ Subframe Spacers
HKS Vein Pressure Converter
DDM Tuning 6000k HIDs
Z1 2.5" Test pipes
HKS 65mm Hi-Power Exhaust
AMS Short Shifter
SZ Subframe Spacers
HKS Vein Pressure Converter
DDM Tuning 6000k HIDs
I see. But then I still find his comment strange unless by AWD Brakefade meant 4X4 according to the generally accepted understanding of the two terms. Since the GT-R is able to send power to all four wheels, I think AWD is an appropriate description of the drive-train. I certainly can't call it RWD. I just think of it as Nissan's take on AWD.Sypher wrote:the GTR's main drive wheels are teh rear wheels and power is given to the front wheels only when slip is detected (I guess that's what he means)Ecmslee wrote:How so?Brakefade wrote:and no the GTR is not true AWD
The lap-times in the video were certainly something, eh? It was interesting to see how much the Z was trailing at the end of the race in the first video once the pack passed it. It looked liked it was almost 2 seconds back. I don't suppose the driver just gave up, right?
One more thing, I was thinking about the matchup between the 350Z and WRX STi. I found out that the Z is electronically limited to 155 mph and the STi limited to 144 mph. Hp is almost the same, but the STi has 30 ft-lb more torque 1600 rpm sooner. Factoring in the AWD and weight with the STi weighing in at 3351 lbs and the 350Z at 3370 lbs, I'm not surprised to see that R&T was able to post better 0-60, 0-100, and 1/4 mi. times with the STi. (4.9 vs 5.6 sec., 12.6 vs 13.7 sec., and 13.3 @ 103.0 vs 14.1 sec. @ 101.8 mph respectively)
Since I think we already agree that the STi out turns the 350Z, that leaves courses with wide sweeper turns. Here's where my thinking got interesting:
A car that has better handling can carry more speed into and/or through a corner. In a more technical course such as Tsukuba, a car with good handling such as the S2000 will have an advantage. The tables would turn on a longer, more undulating course such as Fuji Speedway if the S2000 were to go up against the 350Z.
However the STi and Z have very comparable engine power. The STi will also reach its top speed sooner than the Z, judging by the tests by R&T. This should mean that in the back stretch, the STi, should cover the distance faster than a Z would. On both Tsukuba and Fuji Speedway the STi has an advantage. That is unless we're talking about who can drive down I-5 the fastest, one of the straightest, longest, and most boring highways in California. In this case it'd be a contest of who can drive to Disneyland the fastest. Once we hit the speed limiters and drive long enough the Z should over take the STi.
Considering all of the above, I'd have to say that in my opinion STi > 350Z in general. Jomo you've got one heckuva a sweet ride.
I got them straight from the source at http://www.subaru.com/eaglecatcher wrote:pretty close numbers. I'm not sure where you got the other sti numbers, but I found those on edmunds. maybe different years.
Those would be the current model's numbers.
The reason I mentioned it was because the GTR is very tail happy, and every time I mention to someone that AWD leans towards understeer, they always bring up the GTR.Sypher wrote:the GTR's main drive wheels are teh rear wheels and power is given to the front wheels only when slip is detected (I guess that's what he means)Ecmslee wrote:How so?Brakefade wrote:and no the GTR is not true AWD
Only girly men drag, throw in some curves and I'm in.
- eaglecatcher
- Master Standardshifter
- Posts: 9441
- Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:04 am
- Cars: '90 300ZXTT 5MT
- Location: Ithaca, NY
every AWD system is different. I've seen cars that have 45/55 front to rear, and some that have as much as 25/75 front to rear. I would think a car with 3/4 of the power going to the rear wheels would be more likely to oversteer, and the 45/55 more likely to understeer, so I guess its just the car and how its setup.
Z1 Intake
Z1 2.5" Test pipes
HKS 65mm Hi-Power Exhaust
AMS Short Shifter
SZ Subframe Spacers
HKS Vein Pressure Converter
DDM Tuning 6000k HIDs
Z1 2.5" Test pipes
HKS 65mm Hi-Power Exhaust
AMS Short Shifter
SZ Subframe Spacers
HKS Vein Pressure Converter
DDM Tuning 6000k HIDs
- jomotopia
- Moderator
- Posts: 10230
- Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:01 pm
- Cars: 04 STi, 05 Matrix XR (AT)
- Location: AWD Turbo Nirvana
- Contact:
eaglecatcher: gotcha. yes the 300ZXTT is sweet. the STi is certainly glued to the road as well.
as far as the specs for the STi, the current model is rated lower hp and torque only b/c of the change in the rating system, it still has the same amount of power. weight has increased every model year.
the STi's real advantage in the numbers is the (abusive) AWD launch, since 0-60, 0-100, and 1/4 mile all start from a stop. run the 350Z and STi from a roll and i'd guess it's be a lot closer.
every AWD system is different. the STi understeers a bit even with 35/65 front/rear split. stiffer sways can help.
anyway this doesn't have much to do with 350Z vs S2000 i'd still take the 350Z for looks and low end.
as far as the specs for the STi, the current model is rated lower hp and torque only b/c of the change in the rating system, it still has the same amount of power. weight has increased every model year.
the STi's real advantage in the numbers is the (abusive) AWD launch, since 0-60, 0-100, and 1/4 mile all start from a stop. run the 350Z and STi from a roll and i'd guess it's be a lot closer.
every AWD system is different. the STi understeers a bit even with 35/65 front/rear split. stiffer sways can help.
anyway this doesn't have much to do with 350Z vs S2000 i'd still take the 350Z for looks and low end.
2013 Subaru Impreza WRX in Orange
(emphasis added by me)eaglecatcher wrote:If all 4 wheels can drive the car, then it is, for all intensive purposes, AWD.
Whoa, I read over this and didn't notice anything earlier but, upon rereading what you posted, I had to tell you this. I'm 100% certain that you meant to say "for all intents and purposes." (or possibly "to all intents and purposes" if you wanted to be über correct)
http://www.wsu.edu:8000/~brians/errors/intensive.html
http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxtoalli.html
Just to let you know, in case you need to use the phrase in a job interview or some other important conversation.
Sorry for going off topic. It's just one of my pet peeves.
- marcman1987
- Senior Standardshifter
- Posts: 537
- Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2004 3:29 am
- Location: Toronto