[Silverevoviii]

Hey Guys,

just looking for some information. A friend of mine is looking to get an auto 350z. I was wondering what the specs were for the auto.

Thanks

 

[DiRN]

Same as 2003, 2004, and 2004.5 I believe, unless he shells out the extra money for the Anniversary Edition, which may be slightly faster with it's slight hp boost.

As far as the actualy numbers go, I believe 0 to 60 is mid 5s and 1320 is high 13s. But I could be wrong

 

[Silverevoviii]

Originally posted by DiRN@Sep 20 2004, 06:30 PM
Same as 2003, 2004, and 2004.5 I believe, unless he shells out the extra money for the Anniversary Edition, which may be slightly faster with it's slight hp boost.

As far as the actualy numbers go, I believe 0 to 60 is mid 5s and 1320 is high 13s.  But I could be wrong

For manual yes. I know those specs, im more intersted in the auto specs.

bada bings huh... satin dolls any good?

 

[DiRN]

Satin Dolls is quite the experience. It's about 2 minutes from my office. Haha.

Auto specs are basically the same. You won't notice too much of a difference between the performance of the two until you somewhere around triple digits, where the manual will slowly pull away

 

[Silverevoviii]

Very good then. Thanks. I always see Satin Dolls when im over by rt 17, but never stopped in. Looks nice...which usually means good things.

 

[DiRN]

It's usually crowded, especially around lunch time. Fridays the place is full of guys spending their pay checks. Definitely worth checking out

 

[LBSOHK]

I would say that performance wise - both 5spd auto and 6spd manual are pretty much close with a slight advantage to manual ( IF you can shift = many people cant)...
Since you can control your shift points in a manual and squeeze as much out of each gear as possible , a manual will beat an auto...
theres also more power loss with the auto transmission ( about 15% loss w/ manual and about 20% with the automatic - rule of thumb , not always true)
also the auto has a much deeper 1st gear (3.06 vs 2.66)...
so manual advantages :
1. less drivetrain losses
2. More gears = better gearing

magazine stats for an auto Z ?

MPG: City 19 ( compared to 20 w/manual )
Hwy 26

0-60 - 5.70 sec.
1/4 Mile - 14.30 sec.
60-0 Braking - 120.00 ft.
70 mph Cruising - 76.00 dBA
80-0 Braking - 213.00 ft.
Full Throttle - 79.00 dBA
Idle - 47.00 dBA
Skidpad - 0.86 g.
Slalom - 67.20 mph

real life ?
I've seen guys do 13.5 with only test pipes and toyo tires...
I've read about guys doing 13.8 completely stock ...
hope this helps a little..

thread moved.. - or not , admin PMed

 

[steve350z]

i can manual shift my 5AT almost as fast as a manual. tranny has very little delay time when engaging. both IMO are pretty close just i find the auto is better for the type of driving i do

 

[DiRN]

I kinda have to disagree with you Steve. Maybe I just have a bad tranny, but there is considerable lag between when I upshift my 5AT and when the shift actually occurs. (Considerable meaning not instantaneous)

 

[cedusett]

That's strange. I thought AT's were supposed to be much faster than manual Tranny's? Isn't that why it's supposed to be so much harder to race an AT car?

 

[DiRN]

The reason it's harder to race an AT car is because the human element has been removed. A good manual driver can easily beat an auto, but a lot of manual drivers can't make their shifts fast enough

 

[dallas350z]

MT's are quicker, do to you control the trans vs. the AT shifting at a chip programmed sync to best spec's for normal driving conditions (In a set Max, key word is SET). Think of a MT as an over-ride, taking your engine (Car) to near limits of speed in each gear. Squeezing out Max performance where AT would have shifted for fuel economy, pollution and ect. There's not much difference on the st8 away times, maybe a 10th of sec 5.2 vs 5.4 (0-60). Of course the driver makes a big differnce but major times are on the track; full of curves, bends and corners (I just said turns 3 different ways, LoL). AT's in traffic and hills but MT's when racing (Don't get me wrong I've lost to AT's). Like in boxing be 1st!!!!!!!!!

 

[Got Rpm]

Wow, this is an OLD thread! But the older posters seem not to understand how a AT shifts compared to the MT. It simply shifts faster than most people can shift a MT. We are not talking about "lag time" between moving the lever and the shift - what matters is the time lag where no power is being transfered to the tires. In this a AT usually wins as it can shift faster than most MT folks can depress, hold and release the clutch.

Your "MT as an over-ride" comment makes no sense in the context of the thread. I can manually shift my AT at the redline just as well as an MT driver can. If I leave it in "D" it shifts at the redline too....without the delay caused by hitting the rev limiter. That common mistake takes tenths off a MT's time at the track, putting the AT in the lead.

The reality - like you said - is that there is very little difference in 0-60 and SS1/4 times between the two transmissions....and by now the OP's bro already knows this. :cheers:

 

[dallas350z]

Interesting comments, and I'm incline to agree with you if the Professionals that test drive the cars didn't post time differences as MT faster then the AT. But here's where I bow out since I don't know much about the AT side sifters. There lies the deciding factor, I would think your right when it comes to AT (Side) shifting faster then MT (Clutch) drivers. It would be nice to see comments from an official driver from professionals who test drive cars. Same type of car side by side with AT and MT times.

Rod.

 

[RUFDRAFT]

Ah, my sons - what has been said here is true (wax-on - wax-off).

However, one may derive great pleasures from making gear changes using clutch pedal correctly. You dig? :shiftdrive: