(Hagerty) How fast is the new $50k Nissan Z? — New Z vs Supra vs Mustang Mach-1

[because_murica]

For $55-60k+ that's EXACTLY what's gonna happen.

I actually see the opposite happening. I feel that if the price of entry of a car (or anything really) is too low, you will attract posers. Increase the price, and only people that REALLY want it (or something) will fork over the cash. There's no right or wrong here, but that's my take.

The Bronco scene was/is also a little different. The Bronco certainly has heritage, but not like the Z, and it's not a sports car so the buyers it attracts is naturally going to be different - more hipsters pretending to be into nature and shit by Bronco

 

[takemorepills]

The Z will have the same issues as the bronco.
Because manufacturers can't make enough of them.
Because of the pandemic.
I swear it's like y'all don't realize that the pandemic is still ongoing, and might go on for another 3-5 years somewhere (probably China) screwing up production for all vehicles.

 

[Lvckv69]

There are a lot of Broncos on sale. People asking for way too much for a shit Bronco

 

[ZZ2022]

Seriously is anyone going to be driving the Z 10/10 of its limits on public roads(I hope not)?

I would never do that...

 

[Denver the Last Dinosaur]

Seriously is anyone going to be driving the Z 10/10 of its limits on public roads(I hope not)?

There are a few places with roads that have no speed limit, for anyone foolhardy enough to want to try it. The German Autobahn (or at least parts of it) is the probably the most well known of those, although they are looking at introducing speed limits and the new Z won't be sold in Europe anyway (someone could self-import one of course).

Another place is Australia's Northern Territory outback roads, although I'm not sure it would be a good idea to go there - there are big LONG truck-trailers that zoom along those roads too, as well as road hazards like kangaroos crossing.

 

[TiresAlwaysFlat]

There are a few places with roads that have no speed limit, for anyone foolhardy enough to want to try it. The German Autobahn (or at least parts of it) is the probably the most well known of those, although they are looking at introducing speed limits and the new Z won't be sold in Europe anyway (someone could self-import one of course).

Another place is Australia's Northern Territory outback roads, although I'm not sure it would be a good idea to go there - there are big LONG truck-trailers that zoom along those roads too, as well as road hazards like kangaroos crossing.

Well like you said.. Z is not sold in Europe. Can you even import one.. meaning would you even be able to register a brand new Z?

Never been to Australia but I can only imagine the outback's don't necessarily have smooth paved roads?

But no matter where you live there's always going to be someone stupid enough to try such things.

 

[Kbl911]

Yep. The Z has always been the higher-end of the mid-range.

Definitions must vary, here, because in the 2020 model year, you could buy a new Z in the US for about $31,000 (MSRP, I'm referring to) and, as has been mentioned, the Sport trim was only around $4,000 more. Hell, even the equivalent of the Performance trim was around $40,000 so, if *that's* the higher end of mid-range, what do we call a $51,000 Performance trim 2023 Z?

This is a move upmarket, as I've been suggesting since we got the official pricing. Some folks are going to be totally fine with it, but it cuts off people like myself at the knees since what was previously affordable has become, how they say, "not bloody affordable." It'd be like a refreshed Mustang GT suddenly having an entry MSRP of like $45,000, which would be met with pitchfork mobs.

 

[West Aussie]

There are a few places with roads that have no speed limit, for anyone foolhardy enough to want to try it. The German Autobahn (or at least parts of it) is the probably the most well known of those, although they are looking at introducing speed limits and the new Z won't be sold in Europe anyway (someone could self-import one of course).

Another place is Australia's Northern Territory outback roads, although I'm not sure it would be a good idea to go there - there are big LONG truck-trailers that zoom along those roads too, as well as road hazards like kangaroos crossing.

You’d be surprised, yes there are dirt roads but plenty of nice smooth ones even in the outback.
We also dint have koalas and kangaroos jumping down the street

 

[indio22]

Definitions must vary, here, because in the 2020 model year, you could buy a new Z in the US for about $31,000 (MSRP, I'm referring to) and, as has been mentioned, the Sport trim was only around $4,000 more. Hell, even the equivalent of the Performance trim was around $40,000 so, if *that's* the higher end of mid-range, what do we call a $51,000 Performance trim 2023 Z?

This is a move upmarket, as I've been suggesting since we got the official pricing. Some folks are going to be totally fine with it, but it cuts off people like myself at the knees since what was previously affordable has become, how they say, "not bloody affordable." It'd be like a refreshed Mustang GT suddenly having an entry MSRP of like $45,000, which would be met with pitchfork mobs.

It's also one reason I've been interested in production numbers and capacities. The price hike could indicate Nissan aiming for a lower unit production. Scarcity and price will be two main keys in getting this vehicle or not.

 

[Kbl911]

It's also one reason I've been interested in production numbers and capacities. The price hike could indicate Nissan aiming for a lower unit production. Scarcity and price will be two main keys in getting this vehicle or not.

I considered that, too, and it could be a way of understanding the initial pricing structure. But Nissan's own rhetoric contradicts that - they're still claiming that keeping the price "low" or "affordable" was a baseline objective for the new model. Either they're being disingenuous about the goal of the vehicle or they have chosen to redefine affordability to exclude a segment of buyers they no longer wish to court.

 

[RicerX]

Definitions must vary, here, because in the 2020 model year, you could buy a new Z in the US for about $31,000 (MSRP, I'm referring to) and, as has been mentioned, the Sport trim was only around $4,000 more. Hell, even the equivalent of the Performance trim was around $40,000 so, if *that's* the higher end of mid-range, what do we call a $51,000 Performance trim 2023 Z?

This is a move upmarket, as I've been suggesting since we got the official pricing. Some folks are going to be totally fine with it, but it cuts off people like myself at the knees since what was previously affordable has become, how they say, "not bloody affordable." It'd be like a refreshed Mustang GT suddenly having an entry MSRP of like $45,000, which would be met with pitchfork mobs.

It's higher end of mid-range for 2022. The 370Z was higher end of mid-range in 2009 when it came out. It received approximately ZERO substantial updates over its lifecycle (Nismo trim notwithstanding) for the product to be of higher end of mid-range sports cars despite the rest of the segment moving onward and upward.

Hate to break it to you, but a 2022 Mustang GT Base (equipped mostly like a Z Sport) is $37,275 before destination, so a smidge cheaper than a Z Sport. But you need to step it up to a GT Premium with GT Performance Package to find comparable equipment to the Z Performance (aero bits, bigger wheels, bigger brakes, premium audio, rear limited slip differential) and that costs... $49,990 before destination.

In 2020, the 370Z was an 11 year old platform for which Nissan had zero basis for a price increase despite the uptick in cost to produce and despite what the rest of the market was charging for newer/refreshed versions of their sports car offerings in the segment. What we might define as "higher end of mid-range" for the segment changed over 11 years while the 370Z did not.

The 2023 Z is a modern Z that resides in the higher end of mid-range and is priced for what modern sports cars cost in the higher end of the mid-range. If you take the emotion out of it and look around and match trim-for-trim and spec-for-spec and NEW vs NEW, you'll see that the Z is exactly where it is supposed to be price wise.

But let's ignore the entirety of that. Let's only account for inflation in USD. We're using USD because the biggest market for the Z has always been the American market. It was originally designed to penetrate the American market in 1970 and the American market has been the largest market for the Z over the course of 50+ years.

In 2009, the 370Z Sport was around $34,000 MSRP. That's a base model plus big brakes, big wheels, LSD, upgraded dampers, and rev match for the manual transmission for those that don't remember. (a trim that if Nissan produced would be what I would purchase). Adjust that figure for inflation alone to 2022 dollars, and we're at $45,818.23.

A fully loaded 2009 Nissan Sport Touring with Navigation was priced at around $40,610 MSRP (the closest thing to the Z Performance). Adjust for inflation, and we're at $54,725 in 2022 dollars.

This is not a move upmarket in the slightest. This exactly where the car was. This is exactly where the car has always been. In fact, the Z is cheaper now for what you get.

I am of the mindset that Nissan should add a trim between the "sport" and "performance" labeled "Enthusiast" that includes ONLY the performance bits of the "Performance" trim. No Bose (Bose sucks anyway), no leather, no big infotainment screen. Just the driving experience bits. There's your $45k Z that I would put my order in for.

 

[Kbl911]

It's higher end of mid-range for 2022. The 370Z was higher end of mid-range in 2009 when it came out. It received approximately ZERO substantial updates over its lifecycle (Nismo trim notwithstanding) for the product to be of higher end of mid-range sports cars despite the rest of the segment moving onward and upward.

Hate to break it to you, but a 2022 Mustang GT Base (equipped mostly like a Z Sport) is $37,275 before destination, so a smidge cheaper than a Z Sport. But you need to step it up to a GT Premium with GT Performance Package to find comparable equipment to the Z Performance (aero bits, bigger wheels, bigger brakes, premium audio, rear limited slip differential) and that costs... $49,990 before destination.

In 2020, the 370Z was an 11 year old platform for which Nissan had zero basis for a price increase despite the uptick in cost to produce and despite what the rest of the market was charging for newer/refreshed versions of their sports car offerings in the segment. What we might define as "higher end of mid-range" for the segment changed over 11 years while the 370Z did not.

The 2023 Z is a modern Z that resides in the higher end of mid-range and is priced for what modern sports cars cost in the higher end of the mid-range. If you take the emotion out of it and look around and match trim-for-trim and spec-for-spec and NEW vs NEW, you'll see that the Z is exactly where it is supposed to be price wise.

But let's ignore the entirety of that. Let's only account for inflation in USD. We're using USD because the biggest market for the Z has always been the American market. It was originally designed to penetrate the American market in 1970 and the American market has been the largest market for the Z over the course of 50+ years.

In 2009, the 370Z Sport was around $34,000 MSRP. That's a base model plus big brakes, big wheels, LSD, upgraded dampers, and rev match for the manual transmission for those that don't remember. (a trim that if Nissan produced would be what I would purchase). Adjust that figure for inflation alone to 2022 dollars, and we're at $45,818.23.

A fully loaded 2009 Nissan Sport Touring with Navigation was priced at around $40,610 MSRP (the closest thing to the Z Performance). Adjust for inflation, and we're at $54,725 in 2022 dollars.

This is not a move upmarket in the slightest. This exactly where the car was. This is exactly where the car has always been. In fact, the Z is cheaper now for what you get.

I am of the mindset that Nissan should add a trim between the "sport" and "performance" labeled "Enthusiast" that includes ONLY the performance bits of the "Performance" trim. No Bose (Bose sucks anyway), no leather, no big infotainment screen. Just the driving experience bits. There's your $45k Z that I would put my order in for.

Thoughtful response. A lot to digest, here.

One fundamental disagreement I have is comparing the price in 2009 to 2022 when the 2020 model is the most recent example we can look at. *Only* in that case does the inflation-adjustment argument hold any water. In essence, what is being argued is that Nissan slapped over a decade's worth of inflation into a single model year. That's understandably jarring and I put it to anyone to show us another car that's done such a thing, maybe ever.

I've broken this down in other threads but the essence is that other manufacturers adjust their price to compensate for market conditions as they see fit on a year-over-year basis (generally) and not because they've demonstrably improved the car in each of those years (see: C8 Corvette, Toyota 86). This is a nearly *30% price increase* in a single model year. That's absolutely unheard of (there might be an example but it's likely in the exotic range).

So, again, this would be like the next model year base Mustang (the one you identified @ $37,275) costing about $48,000, speaking from a sticker shock perspective.

I take your point and about the Z occupying the same space it did in the previous generation, but only if you rewind 13 years. Look at it this way: in 2009, the base Mustang GT had an MSRP of & $32,500 while the base Z was at $29,930. If you assume cumulative inflation to be 34.8%, the Mustang should now ring in at almost $44,000 while the Z would be just over $40,000. Strange how Ford is still keeping the GT so far below that rate, isn't it? I suspect it could be the idea of volume in sales but a) is Nissan attempting to *not* sell many Zs, and b) do we really think Ford is just deliberately taking a nearly 20% (MSRP) hit on the chin for the base GT (or that Chevy is taking a $3k hit on the MSRP of the base Vette)?

I feel like Nissan played this incorrectly and it's all the more jarring looking at the price increase over this short span. The mid-trims will come, as well, I think. And the crowd will cheer

 

[RicerX]

Thoughtful response. A lot to digest, here.

One fundamental disagreement I have is comparing the price in 2009 to 2022 when the 2020 model is the most recent example we can look at. *Only* in that case does the inflation-adjustment argument hold any water. In essence, what is being argued is that Nissan slapped over a decade's worth of inflation into a single model year. That's understandably jarring and I put it to anyone to show us another car that's done such a thing, maybe ever.

Circle back on this a bit. The argument is the new 2023 Z is priced sky high compared to the old Z.

The car did not change from 2009 to 2020, its final year of production. Its pricing remained relatively locked over that entire span. If they kept raising the price of the Z to keep pace with inflation over the 11 model years it was sold in the United States, it would have died half a decade ago because it would have been far too expensive to compete. Nissan couldn't raise the price of the car and they chose to not update it for what could be a plethora of reasons. They likely chose to offset its inferred loss with profits gleaned from volume-focused platform sisters in the G37, Q50, and Q60.

Why this is jarring and why this is roughly unprecedented is you rarely ever see a car go through an 11 model year lifecycle without some sort of significant update. Nissan's focus on crossovers and volume sales is likely largely to blame here. There isn't a similar case to point to.

That argument absolutely holds water. It is the same exact product that kept the same price. The new product packaged entirely new with significantly more power and more features required a new assembly line and new components, semi-conductors, etc. requires current pricing. The value in the new packaging justifies correction of the pricing of the product. Full stop.

I take your point and about the Z occupying the same space it did in the previous generation, but only if you rewind 13 years. Look at it this way: in 2009, the base Mustang GT had an MSRP of & $32,500 while the base Z was at $29,930. If you assume cumulative inflation to be 34.8%, the Mustang should now ring in at almost $44,000 while the Z would be just over $40,000. Strange how Ford is still keeping the GT so far below that rate, isn't it?

It's not strange at all - the Mustang is a domestic car engineered and produced within the United States. The Z is not domestic nor is any component of the Z produced in the US. There are plenty of advantages to the Mustang from a production and distribution standpoint that Nissan does not have with the Z.

The Mustang is also positioned as a volume seller, selling 6-10x (and often more) the amount of units compared to the Z on an annual basis. The 370Zs strongest sales year came in 2009 with 13,117 units sold. That same year, Ford moved 66,623 Mustangs. For their 2015 refresh, Ford moved 122,349 (!!!) Mustangs compared to Nissan's paltry 7,391 370Z units sold for that year.

Mystery solved. If anything, this paints the Z in an even greater competitive light than before.

I suspect it could be the idea of volume in sales but a) is Nissan attempting to *not* sell many Zs, and b) do we really think Ford is just deliberately taking a nearly 20% (MSRP) hit on the chin for the base GT (or that Chevy is taking a $3k hit on the MSRP of the base Vette)?

Nissan is selling every single Z they can sell. I guarantee you if they could move 20k units per year, they'd do it. The problem is, in the US, this isn't ever going to be a volume car. Most American car buyers cannot afford more than one vehicle. If you're dead set on a sports car as an American buyer, you're likely going to pick the one that offers more daily usability, and the Mustang trumps the Z in that aspect every single time.

Ford also could very well be taking a hit on the base MSRP of the GT, and that hit could easily be offset by fleet sales of EcoBoost convertible Mustangs to Hertz and Enterprise. Ford has been doing this longer than anyone else - they've got their market down, and the Mustang offers more options/trims/powertrain configurations than any other sports car out there to a wider variety of buyers. The Mustang was always built to be that.

The Z never was that, and if Nissan changed that, they'd alienate their core buyer base to the point of the car's demise.

 

[Kbl911]

The car did not change from 2009 to 2020, its final year of production. Its pricing remained relatively locked over that entire span. If they kept raising the price of the Z to keep pace with inflation over the 11 model years it was sold in the United States, it would have died half a decade ago because it would have been far too expensive to compete. Nissan couldn't raise the price of the car and they chose to not update it for what could be a plethora of reasons.

Sure they could have. Virtually all other manufacturers do, regardless of whether or not they make changes to the product. If the argument was that sales were slipping already, then Nissan had a larger problem on their hands with respect to the Z and its place in the market. I don't know that Nissan's thinking was "Let's make the 370Z the value proposition in this space" throughout its run but I suppose I can't say that it wasn't.

Why this is jarring and why this is roughly unprecedented is you rarely ever see a car go through an 11 model year lifecycle without some sort of significant update. Nissan's focus on crossovers and volume sales is likely largely to blame here. There isn't a similar case to point to.

That argument absolutely holds water. It is the same exact product that kept the same price. The new product packaged entirely new with significantly more power and more features required a new assembly line and new components, semi-conductors, etc. requires current pricing. The value in the new packaging justifies correction of the pricing of the product. Full stop.

The C8 Corvette changed...basically everything and its MSRP increased by like 4%. It's not that the price *must* necessarily increase by large margins when production changes, it's that the manufacturer has a plan for profitability laid out across its portfolio as well as within the individual models. Nissan has evidently not done this well if the Z actually *needs* to cost this much.

Nissan is selling every single Z they can sell. I guarantee you if they could move 20k units per year, they'd do it. The problem is, in the US, this isn't ever going to be a volume car. Most American car buyers cannot afford more than one vehicle.

Fewer American car buyers can afford a $40,000 car than can afford a $31,000 car, wouldn’t you agree? How about we meet in the middle at, say $36,000? I venture they'd sell more at that price, no? They'd be dipping into the higher end of the lower-tier sports car market with the base model with that positioning.

The Z never was that, and if Nissan changed that, they'd alienate their core buyer base to the point of the car's demise

I'm not sure I know what the "core base" even is, anymore. I used to think that the Z's mission statement was to be an affordable option in the mid-tier sports car space. At $40K, I think that the new model would still be true to such a mission. But Nissan stripped it out too much for myself and certainly others. A choice of other specifications that don't approach the cost of the 3.0 Supra could redeem the situation.