Nissan IDx, take two: 240Z successor

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2015/06/nakamura-next-gen-nissan-z-may-take-inspiration-from-240z/

Hopefully this time they won't announce that it will be FWD or CVT-only...and hopefully they won't let their usual designer get his nasty mitts on it.

I'm betting FWD and possibly sharing the Sentra chassis.

If they stuffed the 1.6L turbo lump into something lightweight, RWD with a 6spd and limited slip they could have a winner. Which means they won't.

Talk about missing the boat...

Nissan can't build/sell a successor to the 240Z cause Toyota and Subaru already sell it! Besides, whatever atmosphere is left in that market is about to be vacuumed out by the ND Miata.

I'm betting it will be a FWD, CVT, convertible SUV to replace the Murano Vert and 370Z all at the same time.

Nissan who's that ?

If they built a successor to the 240Z with an upright engine of equal to, or preferably at least slightly better, power/wt. ratio I'll bet it would outsell the Toyobaru duo.

I was looking at some 1st. gen. Z-car pictures recently and the design is nearly timeless IMO.

They better do some kind of RWD lightweight car or they will lose some hardcore fans.

And everytime I see my 240 I get all fuzzy inside. That design is amazing.

Graefin10 wrote: If they built a successor to the 240Z with an upright engine of equal to, or preferably at least slightly better, power/wt. ratio I'll bet it would outsell the Toyobaru duo.

I agree. I am not going to buy a FRS/BRZ because of the Subaru engine. I've seen and heard too many stories about them to ever want to own one. I was ready to write a check to Nissan when the IDx debuted. Now that they've cancelled it, I'll just look at the ND Miata instead.

Graefin10 wrote: I was looking at some 1st. gen. Z-car pictures recently and the design is nearly timeless IMO.

I was in my garage looking at my 1st gen Z car today and the design IS timeless.

JacktheRiffer wrote: everytime I see my 240 I get all fuzzy inside. That design is amazing.

I am totally with you.....

Um.... the 350 and 370 were the successors to the 240, 260 and 280 Z...

They might pull a Ford, and re-intro a modern skin on the classic design ala the '05 - '14 ponies.

They could do worse.

I love my Answer, but I wonder how I'd feel if I drove one of my beloved Z-cars again - haven't driven one in probably 10 years or better.

amg_rx7 wrote: Um.... the 350 and 370 were the successors to the 240, 260 and 280 Z...

Nah. Those things are like a gang-banger with one leg shorter than the other - "not even holmes".

while im not usually interested in new cars at all if they did the retro theme off a first gen z and managed to keep it fairly lightweight i would likely drool a bit. ive always wanted a first gen body.

“do something… more practical and appealing to younger customers”. This means FWD, CVT and lots of stupid lights and electronic gizmos. It reminds me of the direction that Toyota went with Scion: appeal to 16-20 year old customers who can afford it on a high school/college student's budget. As an educator, I can tell you that most of my students have 0 interest in cars or driving. None. In fact, it's not uncommon to hear "my parents are making me get my license". It's mind boggling, but true. If Nissan wants to appeal to the younger generation then, sadly, they will need to suck out everything sports about a sports car. Hopefully I'm wrong.

I would love them to build a FRS, but styled like this.

As this:

Is to this:

So shall be this:

To the next 240Z

penultimeta wrote: “do something… more practical and appealing to younger customers”. This means FWD, CVT and lots of stupid lights and electronic gizmos. It reminds me of the direction that Toyota went with Scion: appeal to 16-20 year old customers who can afford it on a high school/college student's budget. As an educator, I can tell you that most of my students have 0 interest in cars or driving. None. In fact, it's not uncommon to hear "my parents are making me get my license". It's mind boggling, but true. If Nissan wants to appeal to the younger generation then, sadly, they will need to suck out everything sports about a sports car. Hopefully I'm wrong.

This is mostly true, but I attribute it to poor parenting.

My son keeps buying hop-up parts for his Focus, even after we tell him to hang on to the cash to pay for school (and I usually spend some time helping him put them in - enabler?). The daughter, complaining about the e30 after paying for yet another repair, and an upcoming one for the AC, is not happy. Yet when I tell her well, buy something else, I can make anything look cool, says no she'd rather keep driving it, it's a really cool car.

Not that I'm bragging or anything...

That said, I still think this is spot on. People like us (well, some of us) are more likely to buy the car. Kids like mine that are in to cars are the minority these days.

Whatever happened to straight sixes and sexy exhaust notes.... You want to reinvent the wheel? Better at least get it round!

What happened to small displacement 6 cylinder engines? The 240 was 2.4 6 cylinder, nissan now has a 2.5 four cylinder and I think the smallest 6 they make now is 3.5. I'd think a 300 horse, n/a 3 liter in a sub 3k lb car should be very doable. Sadly Nissan has yet to consult me on these things

Trackmouse wrote: Whatever happened to straight sixes and sexy exhaust notes....

Gas got expensive so we make do with 4cyls now.

evildky wrote: What happened to small displacement 6 cylinder engines? The 240 was 2.4 6 cylinder, nissan now has a 2.5 four cylinder and I think the smallest 6 they make now is 3.5. I'd think a 300 horse, n/a 3 liter in a sub 3k lb car should be very doable. Sadly Nissan has yet to consult me on these things

4 cyl is cheaper and more efficient below 2.5l.

And V's are easier to package than I's- especially since the Z car engine would probably need to be shared with other cars. So V6 it is.

As for displacement- a 300hp n/a 3.0l is a pretty expensive engine. Cheaper as a 3.5, much cheaper as a 3.7l.

If you want a 300hp 3.0l car, then nobody should be balking at a current 370Z, as the alternate will be more expensive.

Graefin10 wrote: If they built a successor to the 240Z with an upright engine of equal to, or preferably at least slightly better, power/wt. ratio I'll bet it would outsell the Toyobaru duo. I was looking at some 1st. gen. Z-car pictures recently and the design is nearly timeless IMO.

I own a BRZ, and the worst part about the car in the engine. I know the boxer keeps the weight low, but its certainly no work of art. If you could get a similar car with a better engine, I think it would be an improvement on an already good car.

There's something about a 240Z though. I owned and raced one. Its got something that's difficult to recreate.

racerdave600 wrote: I know the boxer keeps the weight low

I would request proof. I know they keep harping on that, but a V type engine has the (very shallow, these days) oil pan as the lowest part, and a plastic intake manifold as the highest, whereas the boxer has the exhaust as it's lowest, and cylinder heads as its highest. Neither seems to have a significant advantage from a COG perspective as far as I can understand. Especially because I imagine the crank centerline in a boxer is higher than a V if they are both sitting on the ground, so the transmission has to be higher too.

tuna55 wrote:

racerdave600 wrote: I know the boxer keeps the weight low

I would request proof. I know they keep harping on that, but a V type engine has the (very shallow, these days) oil pan as the lowest part, and a plastic intake manifold as the highest, whereas the boxer has the exhaust as it's lowest, and cylinder heads as its highest. Neither seems to have a significant advantage from a COG perspective as far as I can understand. Especially because I imagine the crank centerline in a boxer is higher than a V if they are both sitting on the ground, so the transmission has to be higher too.

A boxer vs. a V might be close, but a boxer has a much lower CoG than an inline engine (and who's going to make a V4?). Don't forget that a boxer's heads are almost down at crank level and much of the upper part of the engine is just the intake.

I'm still not sure it's worth the laundry-list of downsides though. I don't like the wastefulness of less than 3 cylinders to a bank in any configuration. They're certainly not compact engines either.

What a surprise Nissan putting out rumors about another car they have zero intention of ever building. Keeps them in the news. Carlos Ghosn is a numbers guy, not a car guy. Be happy with the GTR, ain't nothing else interested coming from these guys.

GTwannaB wrote: What a surprise Nissan putting out rumors about another car they have zero intention of ever building. Keeps them in the news. Carlos Ghosn is a numbers guy, not a car guy. Be happy with the GTR, ain't nothing else interested coming from these guys.

Buzz kill.

But I fink its troof.