Actually it’s very fast in corners thanks to four-wheel steering.
I'm talking real life, you're talking a game. In real life the Z32 is a steaming pile, and has been in every GT game. Go to GT5 and drag a normal 2+0 300ZX TT and 1996 GTO TT/VR4 and it's murder from a dig.
First off, in GTS i don't care about your time. If you drag the Z with the GTO stock to stock, the Z only passes at 120mph plus, and that's giving the Z a head start. The Z isn't any faster in the long run either, I pass it.
I already messed with the gearing and gave on of my VR4s 321hp@3710 lbs and a 300ZX TT with 300HP - guess what, the Z got spanked.
If you want trash, have it, but don't spew BS. You're playing a video game, im talking about real life and the post i made proves how slow the Z is compared to it's competitors
Guys, if this car would be so fast (in a straight line OR corners), it would not be 1 second slower, than the Lancer IV (slowest JDM), and also not roughly 8-9 seconds slower, than the 300ZX. It is neither fast in a straight line (maybe first 120 Km/h or so), nor really fast in corners.
Since you seem like a Z32 fan, here's your proof:
Best Motoring is a famous Japanese television show that’s focuses on Japanese performance cars. They’re drivers are actual race car drivers that have WON AWARDS. They tested all the performance cars of the era.
In 1994 Mitsubishis 3000GT VR4 beat the R32 Skyline GTR, a car that weighs 3100 lbs and dyno 270@whp.
! And then in 1996, the GTO MR, which is identical to the 2G VR4, with 67 less pounds, bested an R33 Skyline GTR pulling a 12.8 quarter mile.
The Z32 got 14.1 to the 1/4m for a TT 2+0 lightest year
The Skyline GTR was the fastest model Nissan made, their Halo car. The J spec VR4 identical, how would it lose to a 300ZX Twin Turbo which is a much less powerful car? These videos alone prove how much faster it is
1990 to 1993
Road and Track, 1989 300ZX Twin Turbo Debut
http://www.300zx.cl/ga2/300zx2/images/ryt895.jpg 0 to 60 / 6.5s. / 0 to 100 16.5s, quarter mile of 15.0@96mph
Road and Track,1990 3000GT VR4 Debut
http://www.stealth316.com/images/rt_9-90-p8.jpg 0 to 60 6.3s / 0 to 100 16.2 / quarter mile 14.5@95.0mph
In Road and Track, the VR4 consistently got more praise and better times
http://www.300zx.cl/ga3/300zx3/images/car3005.jpg -
Car and Driver, 1992, 'Slide the High Country'
300ZX Twin Turbo: 0 to 60 5.5, quarter mile 14.2mph@101 3000GT VR4: 0 to 60 5.4, quarter mile 14.0@99mph
Considering the VR4 to be .01s faster when it weighs 350 lbs more, these aren't awful results, especially the slalom, where the Z is .89 and the VR4 .91. Ouch.
https://www.caranddriver.com/review...e-stealth-r-t-turbo-archived-comparison-test/ - The 300ZX Twin Turbo won with a faster ET and trap, (though C/D did state this was the fastest TT-Z theyd every tested). Ouch. After 1994 Tests
1994 to 1999
1.
- MotorWeek, 1994
3000GT VR4, 0 - 60 in 4.9 and the quarter mile in 13.5@103, MW couldn't get the Z faster than 13.7@103, so 3-4 car lengths ahead at the same trap speed
2.
https://www.motortrend.com/news/virtual-velocity/ MotorTrend, 1995, 'Virtual Velocity
Z, 13.9@102.0 / VR4, 13.5@101.6
The Z is 4-6 car lengths away and moving .4s faster isn't passing up that much ET difference.
3.
- Stock 1999 3000GT VR4, quarter mile of 13.2@102.7 This is a thoroughly stock car. It took him over a month to get the launch down
4.
http://www.300zx.cl/ga/300zx/images/rtt10.jpg - Road and Track, 1994
300ZX Twin Turbo,14.4@99.7mph / 3000GT VR4, 14.2@99.0
Another instance of the VR4 being too far ahead for the Z to catch up to with under a single mph. It lost by 2 SECONDS around a track to the VR4
http://www.300zx.cl/ga/300zx/images/rtt07.jpg
5.
https://www.motortrend.com/news/mitsubishi-3000gt-vr4/ - The launch was bad for both the Supra TT and VR4, yet the VR4 did 0-60 in 4.8s and tied the Supra TT in the 1/4m @ 13.6s, with the Supra trapping substantially higher (Obviously).
6.
https://archiv.3000gt.org/viewtopic.php?t=2582 - Popular Mechanics, 1999, Acceleration Nation
1999 3000GT VR-4, 0 to 60 in 5.00s, 1/4m in 13.44s @ 101.79mph
They could have had a better launch, but who cares, no 300ZX Twin Turbo is pulling a 13.4 ET without bolt ons and definitely slick rubber.
7. Seems the Z32 isn't all it's shaped up to be, it lost to a 250HP Corvette by a SECOND around a track When all was said and done, the Cor¬vette turned laps in the one-minute 38-second range, at an average speed of 64 mph, while the Nissan was almost a second per lap slower. "No big deal," you're saying? On the contrary. It is a big deal in a two-hour race. Far more important, the Corvette—with its hip-hugging seats, smooth power delivery, and neutral handling—is far easier to drive for long peri¬ods at those speeds. To put the Cor¬vette's racetrack prowess into per¬spective, remember that the big V-8 produces 50 fewer horsepower than the twin-turbo terror
https://www.caranddriver.com/review...03/1991-chevrolet-corvette-z51-fx3-vs-nissan-
300zx-archived-comparison-test/
http://www.300zx.cl/ga2/300zx/images/cvsg4.jpg - The 300ZX TTs results. 0-60 5.9, 0-100 14.3, 1/4m 14.6@96.
I have even more proof but that should cover it.
I absolutely hate people who can't admit the truth. The VR4 with the 6 speed, 320HP and 315TQ absolutely spanks the 300ZX. Dig or roll. I owned both.
If they release a 2G VR4 ill show you. I'm tempted enough to just upload the results of my 0-155mph run with my 300HP Z @ under 3500 lbs and 321HP VR4 that weighs 3710.
You're out of your depth here. Ive been around all 4. And just pointing out that the GTO is slow is stupid. So is the 300ZX Twin Turbo.
What was your point? To convince ppl the slow ass Z32 is faster? Well, this is real life and as you can see the Z lost every test after 1994 and some before.
