Talk:Nissan 300ZX
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Z32
in 1990, the Z32s front nose panel was made with no nissan emblem. in 1991 they first incorperated the emblem. in 91 the driver airbag was an option. in 92 the driver airbag came standard, with the option of a passenger airbag. in 94 the taller wing was put on the car, and the HICAS was changed from hydrolic to electic. thats as much as i know.
[edit] 200ZR, 300ZR additions to Z31...
The Z31 Chassis also consisted of the 200ZR and 300ZR models only made in Japan. They were both inline 6 versions of the Z31. These should be added, and when I get more time I will try to.--ДрakюлaTalk 15:05, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Z32 Production Differences
I added production differences as well as corrected some exaggerated technical details in the main Z32 article. Some anonymous user maliciously rolled back the changes with no explanation other than "vandalism" - which is simply untrue. The differences are well known and the changes made were cited.--TheOtherWhiteMeat 02:14, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Removed reference to 1995 "gold paint" - there is no anniversary color, nor is it sited in the factory 1995 brochure. Nissan Dealerships often 'create' special edition vehicles in order to move them, but these are not factory modifications.
--64.236.208.26 15:31, 20 September 2006 (UTC)aclater
[edit] Z32 SMZ Specifications
The SMZ was only available in 1995 as a 25th anniversary of the Z the specifications are as follows (taken from http://www.yugobernie.com/images/Misc/SMZ_specs.jpg
[edit] Suspension
Progressive Rate Front and Rear Coil Springs Front: 32-44 newtons/mm variable rate; 3/4" lowered Rear: 25-35 newtons/mm variable rate; 3/4" lowered Stillen Sway Bars Front: 2-way Adjustable / 28mm in diameter; Urethane Pivot Bushings Rear: 3-Way Adjustable / 21mm in diameter; Urethane Pivot Bushings Special Yokohama AVS Performance Alloy Wheels 17' x 9' Front, 18' x 9.5' Rear Special Yokohama Motor Sports Z-Rated Tires 255 /40 ZX 17 Front 265 /35 ZR 18 Rear
[edit] Performance Enhancement
Skyline Group N / GT-R Brakes (r33?) Cross Drilled and Axially Vented Rotors; Larger Calipers and Pistons; Upgraded HI-Metal Brake Pads F&R High Flow Intake Filter System (AKA Pop Charger) Aluminized Steel Free Flow Exhaust System Turbocharger Boost Pressure Increase (365bhp) Exclusive Energy Management System utilizing Powerbeat Battery
[edit] Aerodynamics
Stillen Rear Deck Wing Stillen Urethane front Spoiler Stillen Urethane Rear Valance Panel Stillen Urethane Side Skirts Stillen Urethane Door Fillers Stillen Louvered Front Nose Panel
[edit] Styling / Interior
Carbon Fiber Interior Door Trim Carbon Fiber Dashboard Centerpiece Carbon Fiber Anatomic Shift Knob Magnesium Aluminum Drilled Pedal Pads SMZ Windshield Graphic SMZ Front and Rear Emblems Serialized Console Plaque Serialized Engine Compartment ID Steve Millen Design Embroidered Console Box SMZ-Embroidered Jacket
64.236.128.14 20:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC)aclater
[edit] SMZ
Dan - As a reference article, this should be a source of information on any special edition models made either by nissan, or in partnership with nissan. I can assure you that my posting of the SMZ specifications had NOTHING to do with being an advertisment for nissan, but was an attempt to clear up incorrect information already on this page and further provide details of what was available. As such, I am restoring my edits.
[edit] Image:1986 Nissan 300ZX.jpg
Image: 
Do you have a guideline that says that GNU Free Documentation License images can not be used in the namespace? --WikiCats 01:05, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
It has been over a week since I requested that you justify the deletion of this image with support by the guidelines. Under the guidelines images provided by editors of Wikipedia are allowed inclusion in Wikipedia. It is a contravention of the guidelines to assert that such contributions are ineligible. My objective was to produce an image that matched the quality of Image:Nissan-300ZX.jpg. I had the car detailed and photographed at several locations. It had to be taken a the right time of day for the best light. The image was then Photoshopped, then uploaded. It represents several hours work. --WikiCats 23:59, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
The stock image is fine. You changed it, imposing your widespread of self-promotion on Wikipedia with your photos. Leave the damn image alone. Thanks.
Thank you. You need to provide a guideline that prevents images provided by editors of Wikipedia from being allowed inclusion in Wikipedia. Many editors provide images to the encyclopedia. Updating contributions to Wikipedia is common practice. When you get more experience you will understand how debate works. --WikiCats 13:01, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
The above image referenced is substandard as compared to the nissan stock photo. 72.66.63.132 Adam
Just my 2c from a photographer's point of view: The image shown here is pretty poor compared to the stock image (composition, lighting, angle, distracting background, pole etc.). Unless there is a problem with the stock image (copyright, fair use or other licensing issues) then that image should stay. If it does have problems and this image has to be used, it needs to be Photoshopped to blank the distracting background (I think the car would look good against a plain black "canvas").Zunaid 09:38, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Pop culture/movies/games
These days every car game includes almost all modern and classic sports cars. The addition of this info thus does not "add value" to the reader's experience of the article, it is more a reflection of the game/movie than of the car itself. The mere fact that a car appeared in such and such a game/movie is not notable in and of itself. WP:TRIVIA gives clear guidance on this and suggests such info be removed. The mere fact that other car articles have them does not mean that this one should too, in fact they should all be removed. Zunaid (T•C) Please rate me at Editor Review! 16:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Split proposal
I think this page should be split into two, one is Nissan Z31 and Nissan Z32 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Willirennen (talk • contribs).
Oppose There isn't enough information at the moment to justify separating the Z31 and Z32. I also think separating it would create confusion. I would assume most people don't refer to them by Z31 or Z32. They just refer to them both as 300ZX (and specify the year). So I am against this. Different generations of cars don't require different articles. Take a look at any automobile article and very little of them have separate articles for each generation (example Toyota Supra, Ford Taurus, Toyota Corolla). ren0talk 05:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Oppose There is not enough text to justify a split. This just seems like two generations fo the same car, which should be featured in the same article. Regards, SignaturebrendelHAPPY HOLIDAYS 06:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Oppose What I'd like to see is a stricter following of the Wikiproject convention that follows the home market name, but I think a combined Nissan Fairlady article would be too big. Therefore, I'd suggest
- Making Nissan Fairlady a disambiguation page to all the individual Z-car articles (and have Datsun Fairlady redirect to it), and...
- ...getting some of the crap out of the Nissan 300ZX article, which at 15.6k isn't long enough to justify splitting even if it was a paragon of writing. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Looking through the "Z32 production model differences" section there's a lot of really trivial stuff in there which is better suited to an anally retentive enthusiasts' website than an encyclopedia; "Air conditioner evaporator valve changed from aluminum to steel to quiet it"; "keyhole on driver's door and interior light illuminated when driver's door handle is pulled"; "reset' button removed from dash clock"?!? I also suspect that virtually every reference in the "In popular media" section wouldn't meet our criteria for notability if we cross-checked against IMCDb.org. --DeLarge 12:38, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Oppose aswell, I don't think the article is long enough to be split. James086Talk | Contribs 03:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC) Oppose. - This page is much too small to be split up, especially after I went through it. --ApolloBoy 22:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
