New 240Z Confirmed for Nissan's 80th Anniversary! [Video]

[LadyFRZ]

Originally Posted by Frost

I think they're focusing on the NSX successor for now - maybe depending on how sales go for that, it might bring back the S2k? Good times indeed.

I've seen videos of the NSX successor. Looks good, but not very affordable, obviously.
Honda can't stay out of the game too long though with all this new RWD competition. Come onnnnn, s2k! Great time to be an enthusiast.

[Frost]

Originally Posted by LadyFRZ

Come onnnnn, s2k! Great time to be an enthusiast.

It is indeed - I was too young for the last golden age, not anymore!!!

The ND Miata is purportedly launching next year so only time will tell!

[vh_supra26]

Originally Posted by Frost

Added % dropoffs to indicate growth in relation to previous years.

Looks like the 350 to 370 jump only inspired that single year worth of sales instead of truly refreshing the car.

Unfortunately, the BRZ/FRS sales data pool is too small to show any trending but that's why we look at the MX5/Miata US sales numbers:

2003: 10,920
2004: 9,356 -14.3%
2005: 9,801 +4.8%
2006: 16,897 +72.4% <-- NC or Third gen Miata/MX5 launch year
2007: 15,075 -10.8%
2008: 10,977 -27.1%
2009: 7,917 -27.9%
2010: 6,370 -19.5%
2011: 5,674 -10.9%
2012: 6,305 -11.1%

Source: http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01...s-figures.html

Moral of the story?

Cars of this nature will have great first year or two numbers followed by moderate to strong drop offs.

The key thing isn't necessarily year after year of similar quantity but rather a worth refresher every so often. The NC MX5 has aged far better than the 370Z which repeatedly saw it's sales cut by over 22% year after year until the bottom seeming was reached in 2012 and even that fell through in 2013 (I am guessing the twins had something to do about that). The worst part is that the immediate year after the 370Z launch, sales plummeted right away. The year after the NC MX5 was launched, sales fell but not too badly and has since dropped gently compared to the 370Z.

Once we get more data on the Twins, it'll be more fair to compare.

Thank you for your point of view

The main comparison I was trying to point out was the sales of the 2003 350z vs the 2009 370z.

The 350z sold much better throughout its life cycle because of its lower price.

[vh_supra26]

Originally Posted by zigzagz94

I'm trying to understand. So you think Nissan is going to reduce the power in the Z35 down to around 250hp and price it at $26k-28k usd to compete with the Twins?


There's no way that's going to happen. The Z faithful are already on the verge of rioting over the loss of the 6cyl heritage. They would never stand for a significantly less powerful turbo 4cyl Zed. The only way Nissan can even hope to pull it off is if the Z35 turbo 4 produces close to the same amount of power as the outgoing 6 and shaves off a couple hundred pounds in weight.

I don't know what Nissan has planned. I'm just pointing out that the Z's MSRP has jumped and sales are way down when compared to the 350z.

If Nissan continues at its current rate the future of the Z maybe in question. Lets recall the 300zx for example.

[rcm47]

I feel like our cars is closer to the original 240z than any of the Z's Nissan has made after 1979. Hopefully Nissan gets the formula right again.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by vh_supra26

I also think the new Z will be getting a price cut.

Look at the Z's sales numbers. Sales of the Z has fallen pretty bad. If they keep it at where it currently is at, then sales will continue to suck. The next Z will have to be cheaper like the 350Z to gain back some sales.

Back in 2003 the 350z was $26k. In 2012, starting price on the 370z was $32k. Maybe Nissan wants to bring the pricing on the next Z closer to the 350z? Nissan has to do something with the Z. Its sales are declining, and without a cheaper model to replace it I think it would be safe to say its sales will continue to fall. The Z did its best when it was a $26k-$28k car.

Below are sales for key years.

2002: 13,253
2003: 36,728 (1st full year of sales for the 350Z)
2004: 30,690
2005: 27,278
2006: 24,635
2007: 18,957
2008: 10,337 (Last year of sales for the 350Z coupe)
2009: 13,117
2010: 10,215
2011: 7328
2012: 7338
2013: 6561 (Last years sales where pretty bad)

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01...s-figures.html

The price in 2003 and 2012 are the same if inflation is taken into consideration.

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com

[vh_supra26]

Originally Posted by Dimman

The price in 2003 and 2012 are the same if inflation is taken into consideration.

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com

By that logic a new Supra or FT-1 would have to be around $50k in today's money. Which also fits Mr. Hunter's price range.

[gymratter]

If nissan wants better sales than the next z will have to be cheaper or at least remain the same in pricing.

[Grateful Dave]

Jay was really enthusiastic about the coming of the next 240z, but he didn't really didn't show the same enthusiasm when he reviewed the FRS. Even though, the FRS has the rear quarter panel, the back window and the trunk space that he liked about the 240Z.

http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/cars/scion/#item=261716

[LBC Por Siempre]

Originally Posted by track_warrior

IM EXTREMELY EXITED AS OF RIGHT NOW!! Cant wait for honda to follow the same steps as well.

I don't really see that ever happening. And if it did happen it would come to these shores as an Acura. And the biggest issue is, it better be rear wheel drive. Hyundai F'cked-Up Their Veloster by making it Front wheel drive. If you are going to put a turbo charger on a car make sure it is rear wheel drive. Even though their lower offering of power-plants is a power-puff. I can only imagine the masses of torque steer

[LBC Por Siempre]

Oh and yes, let me point out that they did bring over the MIDGET-Mobile S-2000 as a Honda, which really surprised beyond all believe. I love Hondas, Acuras anx Toyotas just as much as anyone else.

I was watching Velocity this morning and he brought out one of those Dodge Chargers that were purpose for drag racing. What car did he have it parked next too(?) Only an 800WBHP Toyota Supra.

[Whitigir]

Originally Posted by vh_supra26

By that logic a new Supra or FT-1 would have to be around $50k in today's money. Which also fits Mr. Hunter's price range.

1993 supra 50,000 to today on that inflation is 80,000

[gymratter]

Originally Posted by Whitigir

1993 supra 50,000 to today on that inflation is 80,000

maybe you should recheck your numbers. base price of the NA was $29k and $39k for the TT.

[vh_supra26]

Originally Posted by Whitigir

1993 supra 50,000 to today on that inflation is 80,000

I was stating the base price. That is before you add the leather seats, wing, targa top, and the other goodies. I'm sure Mr. Hunter's price range ($50k-$60k) is also for a starting price as well.

1993 Base Price
NA $33,900
TT $39,900

http://www.cars.com/toyota/supra/1993/

2014 Base Price (with inflation)
NA $54,652.20
TT $64,325.15

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

Originally Posted by gymratter

maybe you should recheck your numbers. base price of the NA was $29k and $39k for the TT.

Just a little off