andyvvc Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 Thought I should get around to putting up a review/comparison of my older 2003 GT and the newer 2007 model. HR Negatives: Silly road tax. Price. And, erm, that's it! HR Positives: Better interior. Cup-holders that work and are lit! Twin intakes. Bonnet bulge. Faster acceleration. Less body-roll in standard setup. Lighter steering at lower speeds. Lighter clutch (not certain this is necessarily a positive....it feels a bit girly!). Lit ignition barrel! Sensibly placed dipstick! The cabin is the obvious improvement over the older cars. Available (I think) from the 2006 model onwards, the revised dash buttons have a much better feel to them. The steering wheel buttons feel more certain and respond better to pushes than my old car's did. The leather inserts on the door cards are a nice touch, as are the revised cup holders which both carry a can of drink easily, unlike the flimsy one on the 2003 model. The cubby areas near the gear lever are improved too, with a bluetooth adapter in the large flip-top cubby which doesn't take up too much space unlike the old phone mount from the 2003 car. The smaller cubby is now covered with a neat sliding door rather than the cigarette flip-up jobbie from the older car. Steering wheel stalks are improved, with firmer clicks/twists, and more obvious lettering on the stalks. The BOSE system also seems to have been revised, with a clearer LCD screen and integrated bluetooth phone connectivity. It doesn't skip or cut out the front speaker either! All these interior tweaks are ultimately just 'nice to have' additions. They aren't critical. Indeed, if someone had a 2007 car for sale for a grand or two less than Glasses Guide simply because Nissan had accidentally fitted the 2003 interior, I would probably have bought that and saved myself a few grand. Never-the-less, for those who buy their cars new or nearly-new, the improved interior must have been a welcome sight. It does now look and feel like Nissan have upped the quality a notch or two....even if there is still a ruddy tape-deck in there! The exterior, apart from the bonnet bulge which is necessary to house the “80% new HR engine†hasn't changed. The front bumper has a few tweaks to the bottom-front lip, and two swooshes near the lights which unless you know what to look for you will never notice. TBH, these minor exterior tweaks are a good thing, because the 350 never looked shabby anyway. And by minimising exterior changes, Nissan have stopped themselves from adding/changing too much and risking a “Halfrauds†bolt-on bodyshop effect. My previous car had been modified over its 3 years of owwership: plenum, Y pipe, intake, lowered, UpRev, weight-loss program etc. It was RR'd last year at about 290bhp/fly (240+ at the wheels). So the car wasn't slow, it responded and ran better than the standard 2003 car. The 2007 HR model is a clear step up from even my modified 2003 DE one. The previous owner has fitted the Y pipe and twin Stillen intakes, but other then that the car is standard. No plenum, no UpRev etc. Evo Magazine claim a 0 – 60 time for the original Zed of 6.1 seconds...and 5.5 for the 2007+ HR model. Whether these times are in anyway accurate I cant say, but the HR car is definitely quicker at getting to 60 and then beyond. The acceleration is more aggressive. The gearing seems to have been made longer than even the 2003 cars which (added to a higher rev limit) means you aren't shifting as soon as you do in the older car. That means 60 is comfortably dispatched in the first two gears, with third taking you well beyond 80. The surge in acceleration and the more aggressive way it does this is noticeable. Id seen some reviews from owners saying that there isn't much in it, or that the two cars are essentially identical to drive...clearly, these people either had no genuine like-for-like comparison, or had based their thoughts on a drag race with their mates HR car with no clue if matey had floored it in the right gear or shifted early etc. I'm not saying there is a night and day difference like comparing a Ford KA and a Ford Mustang...but there is a nice difference. Even the gf spotted this on the first 20mph+ acceleration that I tried. Beyond 60 on the motorway, the car pulls better than even my modified 2003 did. There is more power and torque across a slightly wider rev range on the car, which means it feels quicker higher up the gears than even the older UpRev car did. I suspect the improved twin intakes are assisting here, giving each bank of cylinders as much air as they need. Quite what the car would feel like with a decent plenum and an UpRev I don't know. But the seemingly wild stories of 340bhp+ from some owners after these modificatons now seems more plausible to me. The HR engine is a better design from the outset, so with the correct mods and map I suspect it would respond well. Chassis wise, the car feels a little more stable and planted thru corners than my older car did in standard setup. However, my new HR runs the LMGT4 alloys which have a much lower tyre profile, so im guessing this is all it is! I'm not sure if Nissan added any chassis strengthening struts or welds etc like they did in the S15 compared to the S14a 200sx. The brakes are on a par with the old car. Same Brembo's, same peddle feel as best I can tell. So no improvements there. And given that the older 2003 car had fantastic stopping power I guess this is not surprising! I'm suitably impressed with the overall package of the newer 350z. All the smaller tweaks seem to come good in a package that was never poor to start with. (Lets face it, even a 2002 JDM import Zed with the awful 17†alloys still turns heads – the 350 is a wonderful car, and the HR just takes it a step or two beyond) I would still rather own a 370z....but I cant justify one at this point with used prices still well over 20 grand. So for now, the thoroughly excellent HR version of the 350z with a few basic mods will do me just fine..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MITZ@CougarStore Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 Andy, nice write up, nice to read you’re enjoying Zed number 2 as much as you did Zed number 1… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marzman Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 Good write up mate... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neilp Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 good write up! I have the facelift revup 2006 car with the same interior. It really is far more superior in comparison to the older dash... Worth the extra cash for tax for the little luxuries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maccaman Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 That is a great & pretty comprehensive write up Andy. Interesting to hear you say it has more torque as most say the DE engine was the winner on that issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark@Abbey m/s Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 HR torque curve is far better than a DE. The Rev up motor is the poor relation in torque output. HR runs the same final drive ratio , just the extra revs it can pulls makes the car feel longer legged and the torque curve is far flatter than the DE motor. Inlet plenum on a HR is pretty good never seen anyone make any plenum that is better than the stock twin entry plenum. The stock airboxes we find work best for bhp/torque output , Stillens/Nismo's make great noise but lose bhp due to heat soak. HR motor is a nice piece of kit , get a Uprev tune to sort the silly low AFR's out and your have a sweet motor. But they do turbo charge very well , stock motor will take around 450bhp without even beinging stripped down. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter10 Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 Nice review. I've only had a quick 10 minute go in a Zed older than my 57 plate so can't comment too much. However like you I'd love to get hold a 370z in the future. The cheapest used I have seen is £19k. They may drop if they release a facelift version as different as the HR 350z to the older ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watshot Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 get a Uprev tune to sort the silly low AFR's out and your have a sweet motor.Mark Sorry, can't work out what AFR's are..............air/fuel ratio maybe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted April 23, 2011 Share Posted April 23, 2011 get a Uprev tune to sort the silly low AFR's out and your have a sweet motor.Mark Sorry, can't work out what AFR's are..............air/fuel ratio maybe? Yep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris`I Posted April 24, 2011 Share Posted April 24, 2011 get a Uprev tune to sort the silly low AFR's out and your have a sweet motor.Mark Sorry, can't work out what AFR's are..............air/fuel ratio maybe? Yep. And Zeds run very rich by default - UpRev sorts this out and gets more power and better fuel consumption Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.