Now, about that car I wanted...

"PlayerWAN" (PlayerWAN) 12/26/2013 at 12:58 • Filed to: None

1

27

In case you weren't looking, I had asked a question about my next car possibly being !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . Now it appears there's a contender in the horizon... And said contender is this:

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

2004 Z with 77k miles and a 6-speed. They both are around the same price, but the catch is the Z is a few hours away... What to do, what to do?

Ian Duer (320b) > PlayerWAN 12/26/2013 at 13:05

1

Now I have to say something. When I saw your other post I remembered an article from years back comparing the Crossfire to the 350z to the RX-8. Crossfire was the loser in terms of being the most expensive, the least performance in the magazine's tests, and worst gas mileage. I can't remember if the Z or the 8 won. Probably because I was obsessing about rotaries at the time. I'd guess that means the Z probably won and I didn't care.

If you want my opinion, the Z might be a "better car" but it seems more common. I think the Crossfire is more interesting if you get it as a coupe with a manual. Most of them I remember seeing when it came out were ragtops with slushers.

Rico > PlayerWAN 12/26/2013 at 13:06

1

Z over the Crossfire, any day and twice on Sunday. I just don't prefer the Crossfire (or any Chrysler really) at all. As long as you're okay with a two seater the Z should fit your needs. Also G35 S could be considered.

William Byrd > PlayerWAN 12/26/2013 at 13:08

0

I had a Z of that era, great little car. I really enjoyed it.

Takuro Spirit > PlayerWAN 12/26/2013 at 13:10

2

I'm all for quirky cars, I say Crossfire.

So long as you don't mind inflated replacement and maintenance costs.

mcseanerson > PlayerWAN 12/26/2013 at 13:16

0

anything > Mopar

Meatcoma > PlayerWAN 12/26/2013 at 13:17

0

Those are 2 choices my son has.

Although he sat in an Audit TT roadster quattro last weekend and I think he may have found his next car.

Pitchblende > PlayerWAN 12/26/2013 at 13:17

2

If I remember correctly, the Crossfire was based of the outgoing SLK, which means it was behind the times even when it was new and didn't get a good reception at all this side of the Atlantic, whilst the Z was supposed to be more fun, if a bit unrefined.

For my money the Z is the one, its not a bad looker and some of the body kits make it quite a head-turner, whereas the Crossfire always repulsed me. But that's my money and you are spending your own.

drunkenup2 > PlayerWAN 12/26/2013 at 13:18

0

The Z, its a better car in pretty much every way over the crossfire. A lot more legacy and prestige with that badge too.

Where have all the lightweights gone? > PlayerWAN 12/26/2013 at 13:23

1

Jeremy Clarkson summarizes the Crossfire coupe in two equally accurate statements:

"[The Crossfire] is the worst German-American collaboration since a chap named Adolfus Busch came over, tasted the water, and said, 'mmm...I could make beer out of this!' The result was the headache in a can we know as Budweiser"

"If you look at it from the rear quarter angle, it looks like a dog having a poo"

Go with the Z.

Mathias Rios > PlayerWAN 12/26/2013 at 13:25

1

The problem IMO with these Z's is that you can't really modify them because they end up looking ricer-y regardless of what you do. I'd go with the Crossfire personally, but on the other hand there probably is more mods available for the Z anyways.

Textured Soy Protein > PlayerWAN 12/26/2013 at 13:28

0

I'd definitely take the Z over the Crossfire. Can't see out of either one but the Z is much faster. It has a crap interior but hey whatever. Try to find one with the Brembo brakes and LSD.

Textured Soy Protein > Ian Duer (320b) 12/26/2013 at 13:30

1

Putting aside that the Z has much more power than the RX-8, and the RX-8 has atrocious gas mileage, the RX-8 is a much more fun car to me. The handling is fan-freaking-tastic, and you can see out of it a lot better than the Z. I don't know too many people who would be comfortable in the back seat of the RX-8 but it at least has that room.

KB Garage > PlayerWAN 12/26/2013 at 13:30

0

Z car. You won't be disappointed. Coming from a former owner. Plenty of power. Good handling. I never had anything break on mine. And I replaced three sets of back tires to every one set of front tires if that is any indicator how I drove it.

Ian Duer (320b) > Textured Soy Protein 12/26/2013 at 13:39

0

Never sampled an 8 but I loved 7s when people were nice enough to lend me the keys. If they kept the balanced feeling the same win. I'll admit it's a car that I like "in theory" as I'm only extrapolating from quick drives in RX-7s and assuming Mazda didn't ruin the handling equation. One is on the list of cars to own for at least a year at some point in my life.

Textured Soy Protein > Ian Duer (320b) 12/26/2013 at 13:44

1

I had a '99 Miata from '04-'08. I've also got some experience with FD RX-7s but never owned one.

When I was looking to get rid of my Miata, I came very close to replacing it with an RX-8. I loved the handling, and it was at least more practical than the Miata. I got as far as getting price quotes from a bunch of dealers, but I ended up deciding I should get something a bit more usable year-round in Wisconsin (since that was one of the main reasons I was getting rid of the Miata) and ended up with a Mazdaspeed 6.

Which I proceeded to drive year-round in Wisconin, which encouraged it to prematurely rust, which encouraged me to get rid of it.

But yeah...RX-8. Great chassis, underpowered, and really no excuse for the gas mileage it returns.

BeaterGT > PlayerWAN 12/26/2013 at 13:54

1

I would say Crossfire over Z, unless said Z is a 370 or has an LSX motor.

Ian Duer (320b) > Textured Soy Protein 12/26/2013 at 14:04

0

The gas mileage always was a killer in terms of people picking something else... I do have to wonder the real world mileage vs the EPA estimate. I've had cars in which I beat the EPA frequently and others in which I rarely achieved it.

I have trouble with the "underpowered" thing. Perhaps light on torque, but that I would expect with the 9kish redline. Anything the revs to the stratosphere is gong to take some wringing out to make it really cook. 240ish hp in a 3000lb car doesn't seem too terrible to me if paired with a sweet handling chassis.

Textured Soy Protein > Ian Duer (320b) 12/26/2013 at 14:18

1

Looking at the average fuel economy reported by RX-8 owners on fueleconomy.gov, it's right around 18 mpg combined. In my case, I live in Wisconsin where winter blend gas takes an additional 3-4 mpg away for a good 3-4 months out of the year, so it was really hard to justify.

I guess to clarify my underpowered comment, yes it has a respectable peak hp number, and if you're out storming some twisties or on a track, you can hustle it pretty well. But it doesn't feel particularly fast when just driving around town or cruising on the highway, because you don't generally do errands or road trips at 5k+ RPM. Accelerating from a cruise almost always needs a downshift.

Compared with the MS6 that I bought instead of an RX-8, the RX-8 is about 500 lbs lighter and gives up 36 hp. So in theory the RX-8 should be quicker, but since the MS6 has so much more of a usable powerband, it ends up being quicker in most situations.

Ian Duer (320b) > Textured Soy Protein 12/26/2013 at 14:28

0

18 is pretty abysmal. I had to really try to drop the first digit to a 1 on my old 325i, which came out 10 years before the RX-8.

Although I don't usually mind having to downshift to speed up or pass I can imagine it getting old if the power doesn't really come on till 5k+.

Honestly, I always figured the MS6 to be the better daily anyhow. I always thought rotaries were cool, in the same way that any unconventional engine is, and rotaries are about as weird as they come in what is otherwise the land of pistons.

Milky > Where have all the lightweights gone? 12/26/2013 at 14:28

0

He also calls this a beetle …. he's a entertainer.

Where have all the lightweights gone? > Milky 12/26/2013 at 14:46

0

He's not always right, but he's right on the Crossfire. I couldn't un-see the parallel after I saw that review.

Milky > Where have all the lightweights gone? 12/26/2013 at 15:07

0

You heard the one about opinions and assholes right?

BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather > PlayerWAN 12/26/2013 at 15:13

0

I would say Z, but not an 04. Get an 06+ with the higher revving engine. Trust me.

Where have all the lightweights gone? > Milky 12/26/2013 at 15:27

1

Perhaps you should look a bit more into the car:

The Crossfire started out in life as the first gen (R170) Mercedes SLK. The platform was already aging and given a slightly more attractive smock (in some people's eyes) and sold as the Crossfire. You're basically looking at a car whose underpinnings are almost 20 years old.

Throw into the mix Daimler-Chrysler's build quality reputation at the time, and the choice is simple: Go with the 350Z, or try and find a Honda S2000.

Milky > Where have all the lightweights gone? 12/26/2013 at 15:45

0

Did you really not get the point of that last post?! That is my car …. I think I've looked a bit into it.

Also reliability with these cars is rather good. The engine and trans are solid and the only thing I've had break in my year of ownership is the ashtray. I (clearly) decided it was the best way to go with the sub 10k price cap I gave myself. Have fun finding a S2k or Z that you want for that much money.

Singhjr96 > PlayerWAN 12/26/2013 at 16:09

0

TAKE THE Z!!! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO IT! I love the way the car looks, it has a really reliable engine, and there are so many more parts out the for the z since so many people mod it. It is a sports car after all. just make sure to check for recalls and whether or not this Z was affected by them. I know there was some problems with the 350z. the 370 on the other hand is with almost no flaw.

feather-throttle-not-hair > PlayerWAN 12/26/2013 at 17:54

1

I bought a 350z brand new in 06, it's been my only car since then and is thus obviously my DD.

People like to criticize it for its understeer at mid to high speeds, but realistically it handles better than most things in the road,though there are obviously exceptions (rx8, s2k.) I get to drive my buddies 2006 gto from time to time for instance and we both agree the z is much less nose heavy and handles better (his car is badass though and is way faster in a straight line)

It's also nice and reliable and has 300hp, though a 2004 will be just a touch down on that.

The downside is that it's a true 2-seater with very little mind given to practicality. The trunk should be cavernous, but it's bisected by an extremely annoying cross bar. Plan on using soft luggage if you're gonna take it to the airport. The interior is also..uh...bad. There's really no nice way to say it and the car makes no excuses for it. Cheap materials, spartan interior and NO GLOVEBOX (wtf Nissan?!) visibility is also bad, plus those rear fenders really stick out, just begging to be scraped on stuff.

If you want to hoon however, there are few better cars for the price. It's fun, reasonably priced and quite good looking to my eyes. I don't plan on selling anytime soon. I have no children either so the space thing isn't an issue.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!