How do we find the stories that hopefully entertain, enlighten, and educate you, our wonderful readers? Two years ago we used to scribble our bad ideas on scraps of paper, throw them into a wok, and Jason would close his eyes and pick something out. These days we rely on an army of highly trained media raccoons diving through automotive dumpsters. When they return to the Autopian substation (accessed via secret stairway, hidden behind a fake Harbor Freight tool chest in Beau’s private workshop) empty-pawed we just find stuff on Twitter. Last week I stumbled across a whole thread of people talking about the current Nissan Z like it was Schoedinger’s enthusiast car. The Z seems to exist on websites and in reviews, but there have been very few sightings of them in the wild. It’s one of those cars released to a great of hype and buildup, but in two years since its birth has seemingly completely dropped off the radar. I obviously have never seen one, because it’s not available here even though the UK is RHD like Japan and buys more enthusiast cars than anywhere else in Europe. There’s no business case for it apparently, and ever-tightening European emissions legislation played a part in this decision as well (wait a minute, I thought my shouty little island had voted to cast off such European tyranny?).
After reading contemporary reviews and consulting with our very own Canadian automotive Chat GPT equivalent, Thomas, it seems one of the main problems with the Z is that of positioning. Tracing a direct lineage back to the reborn 350Z of 2002, underneath the current Z is essentially a two decades old car at this point and doesn’t really offer the driving experience required against more modern competitors like the cheaper GR86 or the refinement against more expensive rivals like the Toyota Supra. Although it starts at $42k, you don’t get a mechanical LSD until the Performance trim which is a stiff $10k step up over the price of the base model. It’s simply too expensive for what it is, consisting as it does of very warmed-over 370Z leftovers.
How a car is placed in the market, according to the estimated purchase price, trim levels, and optional equipment availability is not the purview of the studio design team. Likewise, neither are decisions about what platform a car is going to use, or how much part content has to be carried over from existing cars. These high level corporate decisions will be made by the marketing and product committees, although the chief designer or his delegate will be in those meetings because they will have a say, but the design studio can and does come up with proposals on their own. After all, all it essentially costs the design team is time and resources they already have to hand. Sometimes they will come up with something that is simply too good not to build, but it might have to sit around for a couple of years until the conditions are right for it to gain approval to move forward to the next stage. The car I worked on after the L663 Defender, had several different versions sitting around in model form, ready to go after the initial release.
A Little Bit Of Z History (Again)
Nissan did something similar at the 1999 Detroit show when they revealed the 240Z Concept. It was a bit of a rush job having gone from sketch to model in a scarcely believable 12 weeks, but generated sufficient interest for a totally different production car to emerge from the Nissan Design America studio as the 350Z in 2002. The 350Z sold around 200k units – not too shabby. But the successor 370Z fared much worse, selling less than half despite being on sale for about three years longer. Why should this be? The thing about enthusiast cars is they cannot sell in enough volume purely to enthusiasts alone: they have to appeal to mainstream customers as well. Someone who wants driving thrills and performance above other considerations may put up with compromises in engine refinement, ease of use, gas mileage, or suspension harshness, but regular customers will not, no matter how well it performs on paper. For those customers, it’s all about the curbside appeal. It appears Nissan understood some of this with the Z, giving the new 2022 model a more cohesive, subtly retro-influenced exterior design, but apart from adding more power didn’t do a great deal to bring the underlying engineering more up to date.
While I don’t think the design of the Z is bad, there are of course a couple of issues forcing compromises in areas that I think could be done better. The first of these is money, as in not spending enough of it. Having to reuse the body in white (the unadorned structure of the car without any parts or external panels) from the 370Z means the roof line is less than ideal. Secondly, the need to slavishly reference the original 240Z has forced the area around the headlights of the Z into some funny shapes, not helped by the large rectangular grill opening that dominates the nose of the car. Since I’m no longer a junior exterior designer for Land Rover but head of the prestigious Autopian Design Studio, we don’t have to worry about such meaningless trifles as engineering budgets, unless David has blown it all on Aztek-related shenanigans. I don’t want you to think I’m ignoring very real cost constraints just to make easy changes on paper – but I do want to see if spending a bit more wisely could improve the appeal of the Z away from its very externally obvious 370Z underpinnings.
How The Old 370Z Holds The Current Z Back
I’ve fed images of both the 370Z and the current Z into the Computer-Rendering Autopian Photos mainframe and made a GIF switching between the two. Peter normally takes care of this sort of mundane task but as we found out a few weeks ago, he doesn’t actually exist. So I had to make it myself. What a bloody liberty. Having the high point of the roofline as the header rail (where the windshield meets the roof) isn’t automatically a bad thing, but it needs to be handled with care. Cars like the Nissan Juke and Land Rover Evoque have both done it in the past, but the difference between those cars and the Z is they have the roof and rear windshield defined clearly as two separate surfaces and parts of the car. The Z does not. Its roof line just becomes the rear windshield and tailgate, without a distinctive change in direction to disseminate between the two surfaces. It makes for a lazy line with no tension, reduces the amount of volume inside the passenger cabin, makes the door apertures smaller, and forces the rear windshield into a shallower angle, reducing rearwards visibility. Let’s see what happens if we alter it slightly, by pulling the roof line up and increasing the angle of the tailgate:
I think this is much better, with a more clearly defined separation between roof and tailgate, and results in a larger side glass area for greater visibility, a more airy cabin, and a bigger door opening for easier ingress and egress. It helps define the proportions better and ties the car more closely to its forebear. For the non-enthusiast customer, a car like the Z is as much a style choice as it is anything else, and no one likes banging their head on the cant rail and ruining their hair every time they get in or out.
Moving on to my other bone of contention with the Z is the nose. The main issue is that big black rectangular grill opening, and how it affects everything happening around it. If you look at the surface underneath the headlights, you can see it has to curve upwards quite sharply to meet the line coming off the hood. This gives the Z a bit of an upside-down ice-cream scoop thing going on. Look at the image above and you can see what I mean.
Torch And I Had The Same Thoughts, Which Is Disturbing
Before Jason knew a real car designer, he identified the same problem and had a go at remedying it himself. At the front of the car, you have to be careful when altering things because of airflow requirements and the positioning of various sensors. We can see the Z has what is probably the active cruise sensor in the lower half of the grill opening so we can’t cover that up. There’s also a parking sensor visible just below the headlight, and we can’t move that without a load of tedious meetings and engineers complaining, so I’m leaving that surface well alone.
I’ve made the leading surface of the hood angle downwards a bit more sharply, so the surrounding surfaces don’t have to move so much to meet it. This means we can keep the original intent of the designers with the grill opening, which was to visually reference the original 240Z. I’ve also taken some Z (vertical axis) height out of the air vent, just to give it a bit more room to breathe in the bodywork surrounding it. Some of this could possibly be alleviated by changing the shape of the headlight unit, but without examining a Z close-up in the metal it’s hard to know exactly what the surfaces are doing here, so I’ve left the lights as they are. Also, after the body-in-white lights are probably the next most expensive part to tool up (easily into millions), so you really don’t want to be changing those on a whim.
Finally, let’s move around to the rear three-quarter view and see what the changed roofline and increased angle of the tailgate look like. I think this is much better and doesn’t fundamentally alter the character of the car.
Alright because I’m not a monster let’s put all this into some gifs to make Peter’s job easier, and so you can compare the changes I’ve made.
The newly released Nismo version of the Z does get a new nose which helps improve the Z a lot, but there’s one small problem. The monkey’s paw has curled yet again because it’s only available as an automatic that starts at $65k. That really was a product planning meeting I needed to be in. I’ve added a picture of it here, so you can compare the official Nissan effort with my own changes for the standard car.
When the first 350Z appeared in 2002 it was a smooth, solid-looking coupe with some interesting details that didn’t lean too heavily into the retro-wave that was fashionable at the time. Existing simply as a modern Z car was enough, and customers responded. When the 370Z replaced it in 2008 Nissan lent far harder into a JDM-yo! vibe with quirky graphics and almost cartoonish proportions and volumes, that visually looked a lot heavier and with its plunging roofline and bulging surfaces, a lot more compromised. Sales fell off a cliff, and with the new Z Nissan is attempting a course correction, returning to a warmer, more nostalgic look that pulls influences from across the Z-car timeline. The problem is this has resulted in a tension between what the aesthetic promises, and what the 370Z underpinnings can actually achieve. It’s a bit like me suddenly dressing like a normal person, and not looking like I’ve just walked out of a satanic death cult meeting. I might look more approachable, but I’d still be the same cantankerous gobshite I’ve always been underneath.
Have I helped make the Z a more saleable, approachable prospect, or would Nissan be better off resorting to tried and tested sales boosting methods like lopping $5k off the price and bolting in an LSD as standard? Or maybe, and here’s a crazy notion: bring the fucking thing to Europe.
All images courtesy of Nissan Media
- Why The Nissan 240Z Still Looks Fantastic A Half Century After Its Debut
- Nissan Will Try To Pull Itself From A Deep Pit Of Mediocrity With Seven New Vehicles Including A New Truck
- The 2025 Nissan Kicks Looks Way Nicer Than The Old One But Can Nissan Keep It Around $22k?
- The $25,000 Nissan Leaf Is Now America’s Cheapest New Electric Car Thanks To Incentives, But You Probably Shouldn’t Buy One
Gotta say… I’m obviously a car enthusiast (I’m here and posting, after all), and I had no idea this was even on sale yet. If they want to sell more of them, they might try getting some on the road. Maybe shitcanning dealers that gouge early adopters? Instead of charging super premiums, maybe try, I dunno, selling some. Just guessing, but not really.
More Miata in the nose is a good thing.
I think the change in the roofline made it more Koup-ish, for better or worse.
Didn’t like the change in the side without a change in the rear to match. Maybe a top down view to see how that side panel change wraps both into the front over/around the headlights, and the rear with how it wraps/plays into the roofline would help with that.
I think that a rework of the wheel flares/quarter panels with a change of the body lines would give it a better chance of succeeding…I would also maybe think about getting rid of the extra lines there only for the mirror. Less clutter and more flow in that area would do wonders, at least to my mechanical design mind.
I mean I could do a full rebuild in Alias with Class A surfaces to G5 continuity, a series of photo realistic renders in VRED to show of those changes as well, if it pleases sir.
I’ll stick a broom up my ass and sweep the studio floor while I’m at it.
The real problem with this car (aside from Nissan) is they made the wrong car.
To appeal to the general public, it has to be a fashion statement. The original Z absolutely was a fashion choice, and it only got more tired and played out with each generation (same thing that plagued the TT, imo)
When the 350Z came out in 2002, the people who bought it were the 30 and 40 somethings who wanted a 240Z as kids. The other buyers saw some flashy (and very good looking, especially for 2002) new thing. It played to both markets by referencing the orginal, but being a totally fresh interpretation of it. The 370Z appealed to children (I was one of them- and one of my parents had a 350Z). This is trading on the same tricks twenty years later. Not only is this the most derivative version of the idea, it’s also the third iteration of a car from 2 decades ago, and everyone can see it. Its not interesting anymore. The people who wanted a 240Z are in their 60s and and 70s now. They’re not buying Nissan sports cars.
The car the 30 and 40 year olds of today want is a modern 300ZX, not a new 240Z.
They should have taken the lengthened chassis from the Q60 and popped the roof off. Same engine, same transmission options, styling more like the 300, lean into the lux GT vibe and priced the same. Not only would the buyers actually remember the reference, the added practicality would have made it an easier pill to swallow for a one car home.
But, Nissan.
You have to keep tweaking the formula across generations to remain relevant.
When I said original Z, I meant 350, but goofed. I agree 100% for mainstream cars, but for emotional purchases, it generally *has* to say “I have the new thing” … something the 350Z and original TT did better than most cars in their era.
Tweaking works for icons like the 911, but Nissan just isn’t at the same level. Think R34 vs R35. They had to come out the gate with a world beater. The Z has been basically the same since I was in kindergarten and I’m now capable of buying one… that just doesn’t work for an emotional purchase that doesn’t have the engineering to back it up. They needed to come out with another R35 or it was always going to flop… and they just didn’t (try).
I had a 350Z for years, and over that time I grew to love the design which I was ambivalent to when I bought it. I still hated that it had door handles from a Smeg fridge, but the rest was nice, especially the early non-bulge hood.
I didn’t replace it with a 370 because it looked worse, and didn’t fix my main problems with the 350 of throttle delay and having a massive hatch over an unusable luggage volume. I replaced it with a GT86 and a Z4 Coupe, both of which can take an MTB in the trunk.
I’m not getting a 400Z because even if the cowards sold it here I don’t need that much power, 280 was enough. And I hate the rear lights (or rather I hate that they’re not fitted to an eighties squared off wedge of a car that they might suit).
The economy is killing this car more than anything in my opinion. I should be the target customer. I have a 300ZX and was very interested in the new Z, but cannot justify an expensive new toy with the current interest rates and skyrocketing insurance costs.
That said the grill is my main sticking point. I like the design from most angles by can’t get past the mega mouth. The most frustrating part is Nissan actually sells a different front bumper as a Japan only dealer option that completely fixes this problem and looks amazing, but it’s not available in the US.
Yes the Fairlady package. Someone posted it on Twitter. Looks so much better.
It really transforms the front end. I’m hoping the aftermarket comes up with something similar for the US.
I got you fam: https://www.theautopian.com/heres-what-a-professional-car-designer-thinks-about-the-stunning-new-2023-toyota-prius/
I think the Nissan dealers killed this Z. When it came out the gate with some buzz, they just hammered it with markups. And when some people might have been interested, they weren’t so interested to pay $10k over sticker.
I get it, selling Rogues for invoice probably isn’t lining dealer pockets much, so lets squeeze every cent out of this “hot new sports car”, but it looks like their pay day might not have come.
Hell, I just looked at local listings and there are still markups. $5k on the cheapest model. I guess to make sure the value model offers less value? Only a couple advertised with a $1k discount, one of which was a NISMO stickering for $68k. Ouch.
I’ve seen one in the wild, so that ties the number of Maserati MC20s I’ve seen on the local streets. It had aftermarket wheels already and looked like an aftermarket exhaust. I think this must have been one of the last remaining Nissan enthusiasts.
The dealership next to my work had one listed for $100k over sticker. For SIX months. I work with three people who absolutely wanted one. One got a Q60 and the others got BMWs.
$100k over sticker….man, what marketing geniuses. Do I want a 911, or a Nissan Z based on a decade old platform?
Shit, that’s more than a GT-R on the same lot if you’re a Nissan fan boy.
Genuinely laughable.
As someone whose desire for a Nissan Z is cut at the root by its lack of headspace I definitely could use your improvements.
An owner literally just contacted me on Twitter and said it’s a problem. If he gets back to me I’ll update the piece.
I think the larger part of why they’re not selling well is Nissan not building enough of them to satisfy whatever demand there is, Nissan dealerships marking up the ones they do get so they’re an even worse value, and Nissan’s crap timing in releasing Z cars. Every time they’ve released a Z car, they’ve done so just in time for some huge financial disaster to sweep the nation. Nissan seems to only develop Z cars during periods of relative prosperity, failing to realize that by the time they release it, said prosperity will be over. Then they complain nobody buys sports cars and let the model age until people have money again and suddenly the Z car is too old and no longer competitive in the market.
Autotrader lists 881 Zs for sale nationwide (I’ve got 51 within 100 miles of home). Current inventory sitting at dealerships is equivalent to 43% of all Zs sold in the United States from time of launch through Dec 31, 2023.
If Nissan isn’t building enough of them, it’s up to enthusiasts to demonstrate that by buying up all the ones in inventory, which they’re not doing.
Nissan dealers have about 180 days worth of inventory at current sales rates.
Saying Nissan isn’t making enough would suggest there’s a shortage, but there clearly isn’t, inventory levels are in excess of actual consumer demand.
What you have done I think helps. But it’s just way too much money. I don’t know what the fix to that is really. I’m sure they just ran the numbers, and they probably aren’t even hitting those atm, so it theoretically should cost even more…
I think really, this car is for someone who wants a mustang, but doesn’t want a mustang, wants more power than the 86, and can’t manage spending supra, BMW240, or 440 money. What other options are there really?
> it’s just way too much money.
Especially for a car built on a 22 year old platform.
I honestly don’t see that much difference between the two… not enough to spark sales anyhoo.
What I would like to see: T-Tops. Or a Targa. I’d buy a Targa version of that car.
so being 667 days since I ordered mine it came in last week I feel a bit triggered.
and whilst I like the nose treatment I disagree with the roof change, low and squat is what I was looking for.
removing the crease along the side is just criminal however.
the only way to make it better is ditch the engine noise from speakers (I had dealer code that out) and put on an exhuast you can hear, (shopping them currently)
that said I am horrifically biased so feel free to ignore me completely as I’ll be out driving it rather than reading replies!
If you can get in and out easily, then I can see the cant rail not being an issue. But what you are in effect doing is what we call ‘designing people out’, i.e. deliberately committing to the fact there will a whole demographic (in this case tall people) who cannot buy your car.
ie, the Supra.
I was going to own my first BMW till I hit my head multiple times in the showroom.
There are legislative rules to follow for packaging adults to ensure a range of people can fit and safely operate the vehicle, but if you’re heading towards the extremes of the range you’re going to start running into problems for non-safety critical stuff (like getting in and out).
Can we get a bit of a deep dive into this and how it impacts (if it does) the annoying as hell shrinking DLOs on modern cars? I’ve had a few recent cars with less than convenient DLOs, and they weren’t always the most user friendly, but not objectively horrid. The Supra is honestly just bad. I can get in a Porsche Cayman daily with zero issue, but the Supra clocks me in the head no matter how careful I am.
I’ve always had a bit of a theory cars from countries with taller than average height people are built for a larger percentile, but I haven’t looked too far into it aside from anecdotal evidence.
(I’m just over 6’3, so I know I’m the problem)
I’ll add it to the list.
i’m 6.2 and not skinny so If I fit most should be ok.
And I get the pain a few years back I was looking for a small zippy car and so many of those I did not fit in. Ended up with a R56 cooper S which was bigger than expected for the driver.
I’m not at all cramped in my R55.
you got the clubman right? how are they for spacecompared to the hatch.
I remember back in the day fitting in 2 door Festiva but not the 4 door.
Yes R55 is the Clubman version of the R56. Afaik the extra wheelbase is from the B pillar back, but I don’t know if this means the front seats go back further than the standard car. There’s certainly more rear legroom though.
These improvements all help the lines appear to flow much better. Everyone was saying the grille, but my biggest annoyance was always the roofline that looks too GTR and doesn’t fit at all, plus that BS crease along the sides that almost everyone seems to throw on everything nowadays that doesn’t seem to be a part of the whole as much as it is there like an amateur trying to add drama, but it looks as concocted, not organic, so it doesn’t work well.
Part of the issue is even with the improvements, it still looks kind of stubby, like the lines weren’t given the room to breathe, which is odd as it’s the same height as the GRZ and even longer. Nissan shortened the wheelbase 4″ from the 350 to the 370Z, which was the wrong move for style and then they kept the shorter wheelbase with the new one (though at least they lengthened the car overall). I think the styling would benefit from even more length overall and to the wheelbase, and maybe they could have made it a 2+2 and picked up some additional customers as the GRZs are 2+2 on a ~3″ shorter wheelbase than the 350Z and 4″ shorter length than the current Z. After all, it’s really a GT, not a sports car (not that emergency seats preclude something being a sports car), so the extra space could make them more appealing, plus most of its competitors have them. As much as everyone laughs at the idea of actually using the back seats in a 2+2, they make a car far more versatile in terms of space for hauling stuff and it’s nice to have emergency seats/dog chairs, turning a toy or sole car for someone who doesn’t have much for other hobbies into a viable daily for a larger audience. Not many people nowadays can afford a toy car and those who can probably can afford a lot more than the Z and likely want something with a more uppity name, particularly when the Z isn’t a stand out in any category and isn’t great value for money (unlike the original Z it’s trying to recall in its styling).
I have finally seen one in person! On one hand I still really like these for being cool and unique, but they do feel a tad overwrought to me-especially as you pointed out in the grill and headlight area. You didn’t call it out but I liked that your version got rid of that sharp upswept crease on the side and went to a softer “shoulder” that was more parallel with the rest of the lines of the car. To me this feels a little more timeless and more cohesive with the retro inspired styling.
Not sure how much professionals think about the aging of their work, but I had mixed feelings about the 350Z when it came out and now I find myself thinking they’ve aged quite well if you see an unmodded one without any of the silly spoilers or NISMO flourishes-and certainly look better with time than the someone bloated looking 370z.
I did remove the crease without mentioning it. Agree the 350Z has aged much better than the 370Z.
The 350Z was designed by a fellow Coventry graduate, I was there a couple of years after and they were very proud of the fact, I think it might actually have been a development of his final year project.
Ajay Panchal who went straight to NDA and turned down a sponsored place at the RCA. Neither of those opportunities would happen these days.
Bummer
Whatever you do, it is only scratching the surface. It is the bones of this car that needs to be changed; The proportions are too short and stubby. The car needs to be lengthened.
I think it looks fine, it just needs to lose some weight.
In related news, Nissan says exactly the same thing about me.
YES!
I’m not in the market for one, but I’ve nearly concussed myself in the past on this car’s immediate predecessors. The roofline is so horribly bad, and yours looks so much better, like the production version of a concept car in terms of reality versus fantasy.
While you’re at it: get rid of the weird metal garnish and make the roof the color of the rest of the car?
The simple horizontal line along the side is such a massive improvement, too. If one is going to make headlamps resemble eyes (especially with the triangular shape to the side) that line needs to be drawn back. Couple with the lowered top of the intake open, it looks less like the car is holding back a sneeze, and more like a upper-mandible-heavy gape.
While I do think you’ve improved the design, it was pretty well-received from the get-go, and even the horrifying M4 is selling well despite an automatic-only Competition trim and upsetting styling. The problem with the Z is they didn’t do anywhere near enough work to make the chassis feel new, but also didn’t bother to make it feel retro in a GOOD way. They kept the softer chassis of the old body (with close-but-not-enough bracing), the antiquated stability control from Infiniti, and added electric power steering, so you get the (abssnce of) precision of an old car but the (likewise absent) feedback of a new one. It’s fine, but the Supra, 718, Corvette and even the Mach 1 are all superb in different ways, there’s nothing the Z excels at here. Want refinement? Porsche. Comfort? Supra. Power? Corvette. Space? Mach 1.
The only way the Z could’ve worked is by throwing in a lot of money that Nissan doesn’t have for chassis development. I reckon they’d have seen far greater gains by rebranding a Q50 as a Skyline for the US market and letting the Z die.
Oh, so much better. I really like the GIF rendering so we can see the changes far better than without, Bravo!
We’re customer service fourth around here.
Just don’t be the fourth on the Firth of Forth!
I really like these changes. However, I’m not sure they are sufficient to push a non-enthusiast in to buying one who wouldn’t have done so before. I definitely think more money would have helped, but cost/benefit of chassis tuning and driving engineering to make it feel more competitive as a driver might go farther than the changes you suggest? Perhaps doing both is the actual correct answer, though I have no idea how many more vehicles would need to be sold to create actual value in doing so.
Were Z33s popular in the UK or in mainland Europe? Were the even sold there?
Sold over 20k in six years.
I like the roofline change – but it’s not enough.
It needs to be body color too.
For the front – it’s not the angle of the hood that’s the issue.
It’s the shape of the headlamps and the lack of a bumper.
Inset round headlamps and a chrome bumper mounted in front of that grille opening would fix it nicely.
My mom had a red 1990 Z (Z32 generation) for several years. She saw an ad for it on tv and I’d never seen her so interested in a car before. We probably had one of the first ones in the area. She would be the exact “other” buyer Adrian is referencing here. She loved that car and when I think back to it, it did do the regular day to day car stuff well. They still look quite good to me. The subtle tweaks done to the new one make me think of mom’s Z in terms of that livability.
The Nismo variation looks like it’s channeling the G nose from the JDM market Fairlady ZG
Was it the Barbie ad?
Not that one. I don’t think it was the Super Bowl ad for it either. If I recall correctly, and it’s been a long time, it was pretty sparse with just quick cuts of the car along with the sound of the V6 heading to redline.
I can’t be the only one who thinks you’ve essentially designed a Nissan Miata RF. Just a little longer and without the retractable roof.
You may be on to something, but the Miata RF is literally a perfect car so I’d take that as a compliment if I was our cranky goth uncle
My main issue with the RF is the fake B pillar windows, but I don’t know what else you could do there.
Especially in God’s own color Soul Red Crystal Metallic.
Edit: reply fail. Was meant for your comment about it looking fabulous.
Make it a fixed roof coupe with a sloped hatchback rear window and those fake windows can be real.
Had this conversation with another commenter. With the RF they get to offer a hardtop on the bones of the convertible, A proper dedicated coupe would be a lot more work and expense.
Yeah the RF’s fake windows aren’t great, and remind me of some other spiders/spyders with an odd garnish trying to do the same, but that look wholly out of place when the top is down – which is the point of the car. 2019 Porsche 911 Speedster comes to mind, since unlike others (McLarens, Lamborghinis) the fairings (actual term escapes me) don’t also function as air intakes for the engine/brakes.
I think the RF would look fine without the black panel, and they could/should lean on the spider/spyder look from the European exotics that did it well (Ferrari 360 & 430 come to mind) even though those are mid-engined.
The RF looks fabulous so I’m clearly a genius.
I thought they were selling low because they aren’t making a bunch of them to begin with, so it’s either just straight up unavailable or some stupid markup.
looks-wise, it’s just ugly, that square grill is the worst, I know what they were referencing, but it doesn’t work at all and the little squinty headlights don’t help anything. the back end is okay.
I looked on Autorader before writing this. There’s plenty out there at about list.
fair, that must be some old info I’ve left stuck in my mind from earlier in it’s life.
There were insane markups, but unlike the GR Corolla and other such cars that have no real alternatives, the Z faces stiff competition, and by the time supply caught up and markups went away, everyone had forgotten about it and now they stay unsold. I’ve only seen one of them on the road, even at this weekend’s cars and coffee with 100+ cars in attendance I didn’t see a single Z.
The GR Corolla does have real alternatives though. There’s the WRX, Golf R, Civic Type R, et cetera. If you go light on the options it’s pretty competitive at MSRP but once you’re at the fancy editions/post markups in the 40s/50s it makes a lot less sense.
Yes, in terms of market segment, but I’m talking more in terms of what makes people want it.
Think about it this way: The GR Corolla is, to many people, the BEST hot hatch anyone could make today, it has real advantages over cars a segment above it such as a great AWD system, hatchback practicality and light weight, so a few people with BMW 3-series money were still willing to drop it on the Corolla because it was what they really wanted.
The Z, on the other hand, is a pretty powerful RWD GT car with 2 seats. That puts it with the Supra, Corvette and Cayman, all of which are more expensive, but consider the current GT market, where most people prefer a 2+2, and it has to contend with the Mustang GT and BMW M240i. At markup, you’d be looking at an M2, Mach 1, Cayman or Stingray for the same price, all of which are actually WORTH that much, and all of which offer the same thing plus extras.
So it’s not that the GR is alone in its market segment, it’s just that it has features that make it stand out, it’s seasoned different than the other hot hatches, whereas the Z is just the usual recipe with cheaper ingredients.