Is it worth "upgrading" to the 370z

[coldel]

ahem...cough...supercharged VX220...cough cough

[Jetpilot]

I wouldnt have bought that if I had plans of using it with any seriousness on the road, for a one car suits all I would definitely be looking at a 135i with a 370z budget.

[coldel]

It was more around the comment of being too old

[Jetpilot]

Lots of old men have "classic sports cars"

[coldel]

Lots of old men have got into a classic sports VX220 and needed a winch to get them out again

[Rocket_Rabbit]

You really need multiple vehicles - no one vehicle does everything.

 

I tried using a Saab 9000 for work once (much better than a Mondeo) ....... I lasted about a week as what had been a reasonably enjoyable drive turned into a slow and boring one

 

Im not saying they are the be all and end all but the E8* and F2* with the bigger engines and fast Golfs are as close to a single car that does everything I can think of:

 

5 seats with big boot or hatchback with 2, 3 or 5 doors, as standard they will do 40+ mpg easily and even with 997T performance can still see 30+ mpg. They are fun for a thrash, great on a run, have excellent cabin and build quality and are good enough to embarrass a lot of stuff on track, the Golfs are bulletproof and later 1 series are pretty reliable too.

When you can get all of that for under £15K and not worry about depreciation thats a difficult argument to beat - even servicing isnt too bad if you take it to an Indy. No doubt someone will say "mehh, but they all look the same" but realistically nearly anything with 4 seats and a boot looks the same as everything else anyway.

 

Ive always said that BMW are the place to look if you only need one car - 330d touring and 535d touring are just magnificent family cars, and the M550d I drove a little while ago was the definition of executive express but still returned 35mpg at Autobahn speeds. I used to describe the the E46 M3 4 door as the best single car purchase anywhere and the B58 engine 1 and 2 series are moving the game on again, standard cars are actually showing better power and torque figures than M2's ........ :o

 

Im sure there are other cars that can be all things to all men, the days of having to have a family car, a commuting hack and a weekend car are long gone IMO

I'm not caring about straight line performance with the Mondeo. But it's more reliable than a Saab and the bits are cheaper if it should go wrong. I paid £1500 for my Mondeo 3 years ago and it keeps going. Never failed to start and tows the kit car with ease. It is getting chopped in for a van though I think.

 

You think of performance as straight lines. Bored. If You want a stright line rush, like I said, get a bike. 0-140mph in 10 seconds.

 

No diesel cancer bus should ever be allowed on a track and I don't care how many times Audi have won Le Mans with them. I just don't see how one car fits, too much of a compromise especially if your car likes to see track.

 

The one thing you don't get from a turbo car is a crisp throttle. Said mate who had the M135i immediately commented on how direct the 350Z makes it's power and how responsive it is. The other thing a 135 lacks is an LSD which is a big loss. I haven't had chance to give one death on a track yet and haven't even seen one on track to comment on their true on the limit composure. I took a 335i around Curbrough sprint course and was impressed at the ability of the front end. The lack of diff probably cost it a couple of seconds in laptime though, especially with the jumped up auto box.

[Jetpilot]

Lots of old men have got into a classic sports VX220 and needed a winch to get them out again

 

I prefer a hoist or simply airlifted in and out

[Alpinaman]

You really need multiple vehicles - no one vehicle does everything.

 

I tried using a Saab 9000 for work once (much better than a Mondeo) ....... I lasted about a week as what had been a reasonably enjoyable drive turned into a slow and boring one

 

Im not saying they are the be all and end all but the E8* and F2* with the bigger engines and fast Golfs are as close to a single car that does everything I can think of:

 

5 seats with big boot or hatchback with 2, 3 or 5 doors, as standard they will do 40+ mpg easily and even with 997T performance can still see 30+ mpg. They are fun for a thrash, great on a run, have excellent cabin and build quality and are good enough to embarrass a lot of stuff on track, the Golfs are bulletproof and later 1 series are pretty reliable too.

When you can get all of that for under £15K and not worry about depreciation thats a difficult argument to beat - even servicing isnt too bad if you take it to an Indy. No doubt someone will say "mehh, but they all look the same" but realistically nearly anything with 4 seats and a boot looks the same as everything else anyway.

 

Ive always said that BMW are the place to look if you only need one car - 330d touring and 535d touring are just magnificent family cars, and the M550d I drove a little while ago was the definition of executive express but still returned 35mpg at Autobahn speeds. I used to describe the the E46 M3 4 door as the best single car purchase anywhere and the B58 engine 1 and 2 series are moving the game on again, standard cars are actually showing better power and torque figures than M2's ........ :o

 

Im sure there are other cars that can be all things to all men, the days of having to have a family car, a commuting hack and a weekend car are long gone IMO

I'm not caring about straight line performance with the Mondeo. But it's more reliable than a Saab and the bits are cheaper if it should go wrong. I paid £1500 for my Mondeo 3 years ago and it keeps going. Never failed to start and tows the kit car with ease. It is getting chopped in for a van though I think.

 

You think of performance as straight lines. Bored. If You want a stright line rush, like I said, get a bike. 0-140mph in 10 seconds.

 

No diesel cancer bus should ever be allowed on a track and I don't care how many times Audi have won Le Mans with them. I just don't see how one car fits, too much of a compromise especially if your car likes to see track.

 

The one thing you don't get from a turbo car is a crisp throttle. Said mate who had the M135i immediately commented on how direct the 350Z makes it's power and how responsive it is. The other thing a 135 lacks is an LSD which is a big loss. I haven't had chance to give one death on a track yet and haven't even seen one on track to comment on their true on the limit composure. I took a 335i around Curbrough sprint course and was impressed at the ability of the front end. The lack of diff probably cost it a couple of seconds in laptime though, especially with the jumped up auto box.

 

 

Jumped up auto ?

 

DCT ?

[roscopervis]

Back to the original question, I was in a similar position a few months ago, originally thought was the 370Z wasn't worth the extra and I should get a M135i coupe. In the end I got a Cayman!

Edited January 6, 2017 by roscopervis

[Humpy]

Lots of old men have got into a classic sports VX220 and needed a winch to get them out again

Even young men 😂

 

Sent from my E6853 using Tapatalk

 

 

[coldel]

Ha!

 

[Payco]

Is that SMD and Humpy at the Grasshopper ?

Edited January 6, 2017 by Payco

[coldel]

Yip, for a very short time I could have a preview of what it would look like if I lowered it

[Flex]

I doubt they'd both fit now, sorry fellas, same for me.

[docwra]

I'm not caring about straight line performance with the Mondeo. But it's more reliable than a Saab and the bits are cheaper if it should go wrong. I paid £1500 for my Mondeo 3 years ago and it keeps going. Never failed to start and tows the kit car with ease. It is getting chopped in for a van though I think.

 

Do you enjoy driving it though? Is that not supposed to be part of the experience? I enjoyed my Saab turbos, I adore driving my 1er.

 

You think of performance as straight lines. Bored. If You want a stright line rush, like I said, get a bike. 0-140mph in 10 seconds.

 

Errr, no I dont, corners are where all the fun is and cars do corners faster than bikes. You can also take 3 of your mates and their luggage, not get wet when it rains and have a fighting chance of surviving a crash. 0-125 in 11.5 seconds isnt too shabby either

 

The other thing a 135 lacks is an LSD which is a big loss.

 

Very true, took me about £800 to rectify, it now works reasonably well as a driftcar as well. Throttle response ........ youre right but a 400hp N/A is going to murder you on fuel and emissions, with a bit of tweaking a FBW throttle on a turbo can be pretty good.

 

The point Im making is that while you arent going to get an 8 seater that does 80mpg and will also win the British Touring car championship, there are a few cars out there that are very, very close to being all things to all men. And they are pretty much all BMWs.

[Richf]

 

You think of performance as straight lines. Bored. If You want a stright line rush, like I said, get a bike. 0-140mph in 10 seconds.

 

 

 

0-140 in 10 seconds = wrong bike

[Dave6188]

Honestly hate it when people say bikes are only quick in a straight line, I have both and can honestly say this is a bullshit comment to make, either that or you need to grow a set and learn how to ride !!!

 

Nothing will come even close to a bike for the same amount of money in terms of braking, handling, speed, feedback and feel, well basically everything. Granted not great in winter but I know which I chose everytime out of the Z and my bike in summer.

 

P.s. an S1000RR 0-186mph stock 11.8 seconds, timed with a data logger. If you wanna see how a fast car fares up against a bike in the real world read EVO Magazines test of the S1000RR vs the Bugatti Veyron.

[davey_83]

To be fair not many folks can push a bike on the street to its full potential even in a straight line off the mark, whereas in a car it's alot easier to extract the performance.

 

A stock GTR would smoke a 05' R1 around the ring with ease and doesn't have to look like a power ranger doing it.

[Strudul]

To be fair not many folks can push a bike on the street to its full potential even in a straight line off the mark, whereas in a car it's alot easier to extract the performance.

 

A stock GTR would smoke a 05' R1 around the ring with ease and doesn't have to look like a power ranger doing it.

Not to mention it's a hell of a lot less catastrophic if you **** up.

Edited January 7, 2017 by Strudul

[Dave6188]

To be fair not many folks can push a bike on the street to its full potential even in a straight line off the mark, whereas in a car it's alot easier to extract the performance.

 

A stock GTR would smoke a 05' R1 around the ring with ease and doesn't have to look like a power ranger doing it.

 

Your comparing what is an old bike with old technology against a new car with new technology, look at lap times for the S1000RR or the ZX10R for that matter against the Nismo GTR and the bikes beat the car. Look at it this way on the Topgear test track the S1000RR was only 1 second slower than the V8 Ariel Atom (which is powered by 2 bike engines) makes the bike quicker around that particular track than a Koenigsegg, Gumpert Apollo, Ferrari Enzo..... shall I carry on ?

 

Unless your a millionaire and can afford to buy and run a supercar/hypercar which if your on this forum most probably isn't likely then a bike is the only other option to what I would class as extreme performance for very, very little money.

[Dave6188]

Oh and as for the comment you can't push motorbikes on the street to its full potential, I agree but I don't think you can push a car on the street to its full potential either.

 

How on earth can you not push a bike "off the mark" explain ??? Modern bikes have rider aids to help push even closer to the limit eg traction control, anti wheelie, wet mode, abs. Even old bikes launch well without rider aids so your comment is invalid, again learn how to ride if this is the case.

 

Tell me what was the last bike you rode ?

[Alpinaman]

I rode super bikes on the roads until I was 30 and their is no comparison to a car... the experience is so far detached it isn't comparable..

 

I realised that my talent on a bike was becoming easily surpassed by the bikes capabilities, other drivers trying to take you out on a daily basis and the dwindling amount of decent roads meant the end for me with bikes.. I rode them far to fast anyway causing 2 driving bans in my 20's

 

I look back fondly and think " I got away with it"

[Jetpilot]

As has been "discussed" before on here, if people think bikes arent fast, just watch some iom tt, corners a plenty and cars cant even come close to the bike times, never have and never will and thats standard out the shop superbikes on standard off the shelf road tyres.

[coldel]

A kind of pointless comparison really. You may as well be saying 'ha your Cannondale peddle bike costs the same as my Zed but gets no where near in performance terms'. They are completely different machines, just because a bike has an engine some wheels and goes on the road, thats about the only things in common they have with cars. Might as well just weigh in to say my F16 jet plane goes 0-60 in under a second and could go round the ring in about 15 seconds beat that the lot of ya

[Ekona]

Your comparing what is an old bike with old technology against a new car with new technology, look at lap times for the S1000RR or the ZX10R for that matter against the Nismo GTR and the bikes beat the car. Look at it this way on the Topgear test track the S1000RR was only 1 second slower than the V8 Ariel Atom (which is powered by 2 bike engines) makes the bike quicker around that particular track than a Koenigsegg, Gumpert Apollo, Ferrari Enzo..... shall I carry on ?

So you're comparing old cars with old technology against a new bike with new technology?