Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

2009_nissan_370z_main630_01-1029-636x360.jpg

wow... the first thing I thought about when I saw that rear quarter was this:

large501576.jpg

Fuckin awesome work nissan... finally the Z doesn't look like a steaming pile of turd (aka Z31, Z32, Z33)... but has gone back to looking like a smooth sexy cheap Ferrari 250 GTO lookalike.

lol

Also new is the rear quarter panel area around the hatch, where the window line sweeps upward, giving the car a bit of a familial resemblance to the sword-like design of the GT-R.
clearly has his finger on the pulse when it comes to heritage based design cues.

I'd have to see it in person before I can make a final judgement.

it may grow on me, I wan't a fan of the 350z when it came out but I ended up loving it after seeing them in the flesh

From the spy video the front looks so aggressive, like it's gonna take a bite out of the car in front, kind of reminds me of a pihrana

From picture on the link the side view is all over the place and doesn't look all that cohesive, but again probably works better in person.

But more positives than negatives so far. Should've went back to circle headlights if they really wanted to go back to the 240z styling :)

the front kinda looks like a face that is emotionally 'frightened'

the back slope is terrible and what is with the size of those rear windows; might as well not have them at all.

much prefer the older model.

the front kinda looks like a face that is emotionally 'frightened'

LOL!!

It looks alright.. never been a fan of the new Z anyway.

Edit: ewwww... just noticed the light. .. thats nasty.

Edited by __PhaseShiftDown
i like it, harks back to its grandaddy 240Z

^^^+1

That's just what I thought too. With the perception of a longer snout, it reminded me of the first Z.

Might be entering another golden era of late 80s and late 70s.

80s = 300ZX + R32 GT-R

70s = C110 + 240Z

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Thanks folks - I've saved a few links and I'll have to think of potential cable/adapters/buying fittings. First step will be seeing if I can turn the curren abortion of a port into something usable, then get all BSPT'y on it. I did attempt to look at the OEM sender male end to see if it IS tapered because as mentioned you should be able to tell by looking at it... well, I don't know if I can. If I had to guess it looks like *maybe* 0.25 of a mm skinnier at the bottom of the thread compared to where the thread starts. So if it is tapered it's pretty slight - Or all the examples of BSPT vs BSPP are exaggerated for effect in their taper size.
    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
×
×
  • Create New...