The comment about "Ford sending the Mustang out to battle with out enough power" is quite possibly one of the most retarded things I've ever heard.
If Ford had made the Mustang a high powererd, rare V8 sports car, do you think half the people on this forum woudl be able to afford one? Hell no.
I'm not tryign to make the money argument, but in this scenario, anytime you bring up a used car, in this case the Mustang, you HAVE to take that into account.
I paid 9500 dollars for my car, 5 years old, with less than 50K miles.
I HIGLY doubt you can find a 4 year old 350Z with under 50K miles for under 13-14K.
I'd rather pay less for a car like the Mustang, than not be able to afford anything to begin with.
_____________________________
Replaced Since Feb ''''''''08: Pass. Cylinder Head-600ish in Parts Both Outer Tie Rods-400 parts/labor Coolant Leak-200ish parts
I BROKE MY TIMING CHAIN COVER 100sih in parts-12-15 hours in my own mf''''in labor.
I am only curious to know how a car with maybe 260 RWHP and 228 or so RWTQ ran a 13.2 stock. The car by itself, weighs what, 3400 lbs.? Add the driver, plus any add on as far as options. I am guessing around 3650 or so. Perhaps the driver will tell us how much he weighs, and what model Z, enthusiast, touring, etc.
A true sports car is a 2 door, 2 seater... many people will argue that (and I wouldn't expect anything less)...but a Mustang has never been and will likely never be a true sports car... Muscle Car yes...sports car nope.
As far as the mustang having enough... the very people that drive mustangs have complained about the very same thing for the past 15+ years now... some people are content with it... that's your choice. I wouldn't like worrying about what fwd/family car is going to beat me 10 minutes after leaving the dealership with my new car.
I have to worry but then again I have a 6 year old car....and technology is a bitch.
Also fwiw ..some of you guys are bit crazy with the 13.4 ~ 13.6 stock range you toss out. How many Stock S197s have gone 13.4? 1? 2? It's like saying the stock F-Body range is 12.7 ~ 13.0 when in reality it's higher...
The 07 350s are still proving themselves but already a good number of been south of 13.5 stock... it deserves some kind of respect but I don't expect much from some of this group. I think I pretty much know who has a clue what's going on by now.
FWIW the trick with 350zs appears to be 265 width tires from the factory and their ability to launch from 3000+ rpm... they really haul ass off the line and build power up top nicely... (4V vs 3V I suppose)....
_____________________________
2001 Z28 M6 - 13.1 @ 108mph 2.1 60ft / Bone Stock (FRA / 1LE Springs - No new times yet)
Has anyone actually dyno'd a 07-up 350Z? I'm curious what they really put down. Remember the Machs? 305bhp in a car that though it wasn't heavy, wasn't light either. And a claim of 13.2 stock isn't a stretch at all. Why? General concensus is that they were under rated, so are the 07 Z's under rated as well? Or are they just a very finely balanced vehicle? The reality is that the Z has similar power to to the S197 with a slightly less torquey engine, but slightly better gearing and it's a hair lighter. I'd like to know what the actual wheel torque vs vehicle weight for both cars are, I'm willing to bet that it's pretty dang close. An S197 and 07 350Z are very comparable cars, and before anyone rants on in total and utter retardation about the Z not having torque, go back and actually read(if you haven't already) those long ass posts I took the time to type out.
_____________________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!
Best run 13.23 at 106.97mph with a 2.183 60' Times from before tune and driver mod.
Just thought I'd ad a few comments. Sinse I don't own a 350Z or a Mustang I really dont have a nickle in this. 1. I can see why everyone is doubting the time. It is easy to hide things like weight reduction. And most people consider intake & exhaust to still be stock. And it does seam strange that he's so much ahead of the other posted 350 Z times! 2.I believe the time is possiable. A factory freak running at a very well prepped track with mine shaft perfect Weather and no DA. coupled with a perfect launch and shifting. Kind of a perfect storm! 3. Every 350Z driving douche bag on the planet is now going to be going around claiming "THEIR" car is capaable of 13.2 when in reality it's still a high 13 second car stock. 4. The mustang Is not being sent out without enough firepower to get the job done. 9 times out of 10 the stang will win a drag race against a 350 Z. Please dont tell me I'm wrong because I've seen it with my own eyes to many time. And I get to the track more than most. How many other cars on the market can be had for 25 grand and run mid to high 13's like the Stang? 5. The 350 Z will almost always out class the stang in any race that involves turning in stock form. 6. You can mod the crap out of either car and pretty much make them as fast or handle as well as you want so does this thread really need to continue on another three pages?The Aftermarket is there for both cars.
< Message edited by bluebeastsrt -- 10/22/2007 11:37:48 AM >
_____________________________
Roll racing isn't racing. Its just 2 retards speeding together!
I was there that night in my evo and that car is bone stock and was even having some clutch fluid issues all night. He ran consistent 13.3s and then had that 13.2x at 105 and I was very impressed. If there were weight savings he hid it well because his interior was fully intact. The best thing about his run is that he also nailed a perfect tree. The weather was pretty great, upper 60s and fairly low humidity but there was a 5 to 10 mph headwind. I ran the same times I always ran so I have no doubts about his time. He's also a very cool, knowledgeable guy, talked to him a lot in the pits.
_____________________________
Evo IX, TBE, MBC, Filter, Tune 12.003@113.98 Best trap 115.00 MPH
do you know what model he has? how much he weighs?. Hitting the tree or not, once he crosses the beam is when the timer starts. That was pretty irrelevant.
btw I trapped 104MPH bone stock with my evo that is rated at 286 crank HP. Impossible considering i have an all-wheel drivetrain that drains 25% of my power and I weigh in at 3450lbs with me in the car right? Thread is a joke.
_____________________________
Evo IX, TBE, MBC, Filter, Tune 12.003@113.98 Best trap 115.00 MPH
btw I trapped 104MPH bone stock with my evo that is rated at 286 crank HP. Impossible considering i have an all-wheel drivetrain that drains 25% of my power and I weigh in at 3450lbs with me in the car right? Thread is a joke.
That was a useful comment.
_____________________________
Roll racing isn't racing. Its just 2 retards speeding together!
Shifty, i believe what you said, my friend on your reg bored brought this one to my attention.
Just keep in mind something. your on a mustang forum, so the bias to this forum is of course, to the mustang, if i went on your Z forum or any other and pointed out i ran a time in my car thats hard as hell to get, there would be people who wouldnt believe it. hell even if i did it on this forum i would be expecting it.
to the mustang guys, shifty doesnt have any reason to lie. im sure its able to be done. consistant maybe not... but is it doable? yeah i believe so.
these numbers are getting into a the higher limits of the cars ability. and like with the mustang, im not surprised people dont agree. but people have their opinions... i just ask that my mustang friends are complete ass holes in presenting those opinions because all that does is makes us into those "jerks that drive mustangs" ...or whatever car you may own considering there arent JUST mustang owners on this site.
< Message edited by joshafmil -- 10/22/2007 1:28:53 PM >
As I said before, I've been hearing lately that a new z is a low to mid 13 second car, so I'm not really suprised by this, I'm a little shocked that so many people here are disbelieving, but then again I've only been seeing this because I now own a Z and do more reading on them. I wish I knew all the places were I've seen thes low 13 second times, but I have scavenged every part of the internet and can't remember. I guess it's so hard to believe because of older Zs like mine bieng slow ( 14 seconds isn't nearly fast, hang my head in shame) but you gotta remember, older Zs were on a different power rating system, and not all Zs came with a 300 bhp motor from the factory. Some like mine only had 287. Now this, together with the low redline made for a slow car. The new 07s have better gearing, 308 bhp on the new rating system, and a 7.5 k redline. These should be a lot faster. From what I have heard from people who have driven both, there is a night and day differance. Not a little dif, but A LOT. Nobody would be able to feel a real differance with a car that maybe had a new intake that added 8 whp, so that goes to reason that there is a big change in the 07 Z. I've also read that they are dynoing in around the high 260's to the wheels, and that intakes and exhausts will take them to around mid 290s at the wheels. Take that with a grain of salt.
_____________________________
1994 Integra LS/ Turbo
15psi 308whp 280wtq < Old numbers 2650lbs
motor bieng rebuilt. LS/VTEC TURBO under construction. 400-425 whp in the future.
Well, I can't speak for the other naysayers.......but I have nothing but respect for the Z's. But that has nothing to do with my casting some skepticism over this 13.2. And no, I'm not a knowledge bank for stats on the new Z's either.......I'm just going on what was posted on that list. If you get a guy in a certain car who suddenly runs a time nearly half a second better than anyone else in that car seems to be able to manage.....suspicion is bound to follow. And that's especially true with this group of guys, since we're used to the smell of BS.
But like I said, if he ran the time bone stock, more power to him. It doesn't really matter to me whether the new Z's are 14 second cars or 12 second cars in stock form. And I find it funny that the Mustang guys in here are being accused of being butt hurt over the supposed low 13 sec time on a stock 350Z. What?......it's ok for us to cast doubt on another Mustang owner's times......but if its something other than a Mustang we're supposed to accept and shut up? Heh............NOT. You regulars should know better by now.
I don't think anyone here cares what a stock 2007 350z might run as a best time in the 1/4 mile. This is not a 350z forum for christs sake. I'd be more interested in seeing what a full bolt on 350z can do. By bolt on I mean no power adder and any weight reduction possible. I know spyder is running 12.1 in the 1/4 in his s197 auto which is pretty freaking impressive considering he doesn't have a blower or nitrous. I'm sure a 350z is never going to run a 12.1 without a power adder, but what can it do.
The 350z is a nice looking car, but it'll always be at a disadvantage due to the v6, just like the mustang will always be at a disadvantage when compared to a larger v8.
_____________________________
whipple HO SC,FRPP springs, Pypes mid mufflers, Che adj. LCA, hurst, 4.10's, 1 piece DS, spec stg 2 clutch. Accel coils 12.52@117.6mph so far with a 2.01 60 ft time(pre shaft, coils, clutch).
The comment about "Ford sending the Mustang out to battle with out enough power" is quite possibly one of the most retarded things I've ever heard.
If Ford had made the Mustang a high powererd, rare V8 sports car, do you think half the people on this forum woudl be able to afford one? Hell no.
I'm not tryign to make the money argument, but in this scenario, anytime you bring up a used car, in this case the Mustang, you HAVE to take that into account.
I paid 9500 dollars for my car, 5 years old, with less than 50K miles.
I HIGLY doubt you can find a 4 year old 350Z with under 50K miles for under 13-14K.
I'd rather pay less for a car like the Mustang, than not be able to afford anything to begin with.
I was looking at 350Zs when I got my stang. I couldn't find a used one for under $25,500 ANYWHERE (wasn't going to buy 3rd party...). I got the Mustang for $26,060 in my driveway with a full tank of gas. I know prices have changed a lot since late 2004, but still.
_____________________________
05 gt: 12.54 @ 324rwhp/337rwtq Goodies on the way.
PR Manager for Automotive Dezignz MECP Installer and Mobile Product Specialist Mechanical/Manufacturing Engineer.
I'm sure with some effort and money someone could get a Z to go low 12's all engine. The problem seems to be that too many people here are closed minded. I worked for a guy one time who absolutely insisted there was NO WAY WHATSOEVER I could get my 67 to run faster than a stock S197 with a n/a 302, because my car was too old, and it was carbureted. Simply because of those 2 things, a 40 year old chassis and a carburetor, he was absolutely certain that there was no way it could happen. Ever. He wasn't willing to accept even the possibility that maybe there is some technology or idea out there that someone knew about, which he didn't, that could allow a carbureted car from the 60's to be faster than a new car. Even though there are thousands of 302's out there, if not more, with carbs, that are faster than S197's he simply could not accept it.
Does that mean there are thousands of Z's out there that are running low 13's? No, of course it doesn't. What it does mean is that just because you may think something can't be done, and just because you haven't seen it, doesn't mean it isn't true. Yeah, people lie, and yes, a claim that seems to be "too good to be true" should be looked upon with skepticism, but just because there's reason to question the veracity of the claim, doesn't mean that the claim is necessarily untrue. I've never seen a S197 go faster than 14.20 in stock form, so does that mean I'm gonna call bs on anyone who claims 13.70 because it's a half a second faster? No, I'm not, just because I haven't seen it doesn't make it untrue.
People need to stop looking at numbers on paper, "Oh, the Z only has such and such horsepower, and blah blah no torque, and it weighs something or other, and I'VE never seen it go faster than XX.XX in the 1/4, so it must be a lie." That's called bench racing. And no, this is NOT targeted at those who are skeptical of the claim, since there is some reason to be skeptical. For those of you who think it's impossible though, all I have to say is that it's narrow minded. Remember that Smokey Yunick guy? Yeah, him, you know, the guy who back in the day did stuff that practically everyone else at times would say was totally wrong? He often turned out to be faster than everyone else when he "should" have been slower. There were even people back in time that stated how it was totally impossible for ANY car to ever run faster than 8's, or 7's etc., and now look at what Top Fuel cars have been able to run? Despite the fact that quite a few people who knew quite a bit about cars believed it to be completely impossible, it still happened.
Cars are often a case of the whole being greater than the sum of it's parts. The Z may be one of those cars, just like the Mach's were. Skepticism is completely understandable, but refusing to think it possible is just plain foolish
_____________________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!
Best run 13.23 at 106.97mph with a 2.183 60' Times from before tune and driver mod.
My car weighs (basedon these calcs) ~ 3480-3500 lbs.
3400 curb weight - 15*7 (I have 5 gallons of 20 possible) + 160 (myself and a helmet) + 30 (amp rack, capacitor, etc.)
= 3485
I figure I'm low on my estimates a bit, so thats where I got the range from. I put 16 gallons in when I got to the gas station 20 miles away, I get 18 city.
Its and enthusiast manual just to answer that.
Dynos on a dynojet have typically been 265-268 with correction factors, but I haven't thrown my car on one yet.
That run is not all the car has, I gained over a tenth from 10 degrees in temp drop, I'll run in low 50's and expect to drop at least .15 off of that. Its not a fluke run when 3 runs in a row were within .06 of one another (2 of those were hotlapped - my best time came from that). Its that I've gone to the track at least 10 times this summer and learned what it likes. The track prep I give a 7/10, I've seen MUCH better, but I've learned how to work with less, so its a tossup.
I don't plan to go FI or nitrous (nitrous is possible though) so we'll see with bolt ons. Gears - retune - then HFC and exhaust - then cams - then we'll see about an intake (the stock intakes are EXCELLENT). I expect a 12.5-12.6 as a best run, average around a 12.7.
Lastly, I paid 31k OTD for this car, it certainly beats a mustang in my eyes (bang for buck in terms of performance) because I've run 05+ GT's at the track and eaten them alive - and on a road course I can't imagine the results would be different. I know I may be a better driver than the mustang driver - it could all be because of them being new to the car, but there are very few stock mustangs at the track, and I haven't lost to one yet (aside form cobras). For the money, I'd rather have the Z. The chasis/wheelbase just make it a blast to drive. The fact that I'll have a 12 second car without much work of any kind makes me that much happier.
And Moostang, if you ever see a dark blue (almost black) Z at the track its probably me. I'm not going to be an asshole to you guys, and I won't post again - the car is VERY capable, I'm 21 - no drag racing experience to speak of, just practice - so I'll expect some better times to be posted than what I have now - and soon.
BTW - I know that a GT makes a better track car for road courses in most cases....black forest motorsports proves it (as a local to me example).
Printable Version
RE: Fastest Stock 350z 1/4 time. - 
because all that does is makes us into those "jerks that drive mustangs" ...or whatever car you may own considering there arent JUST mustang owners on this site.
